1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2166 OF 2008 Kum. Apurva Ashok Gokhale. ...... ..... Petitioner. Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...... ..... Respondents. Mr. R. K. Mendadkar for the petitioner. Mr. V. S. Masurkar, Govt. Pleader, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and S. S. SHINDE, JJ. DATED : 17TH JUNE, 2008. P.C.: Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties. Perused papers. 2. Respondent No.2, the Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, refused to verify the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner. The Executive Magistrate issued the caste certificate, which reads as under: "This certificate is issued on the basis of the Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe certificate issued to Shri Ashok Kalappa Gokhale father of Kum. Apurva Ashok Gokhale of village Echur in District Bidar of the State Karnataka who belong to the Nav- Baudha Caste which is recognised as a Scheduled Caste in the State Karnataka issued by the Executive Magistrate Andheri vide their No. 2940/94 dated 20/9/93” The 2nd respondent refused to certify this caste certificate on the ground that this was a certificate issued on the basis of a caste certificate issued in Karnataka State and there was a bar vide Government Circular dated 21st August, 1996 to verify such certificates. 2 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner refers to the judgment of this Court in the case of Hitesh Dasiram Murkute v/s State of Maharashtra & Ors., reported in 2007(5) Mh.L.J.454, in which the same Circular dated 21st August, 1996 was considered. The Court considered the Circular in the context of the re-organisation of the State. That would mean that an inquiry was contemplated but what the Executive Magistrate did that he merely issued the certificate on the basis of a certificate issued by the Government of Karnataka. Therefore, the Committee was right in not validating the certificate since the Executive Magistrate had not conducted any inquiry to come to the conclusion independently whether the petitioner belonged to a Scheduled Caste or not. 3. In this view of the matter, we do not find any merit in this writ petition. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. 4. However, we give liberty to the petitioner to approach the Executive Magistrate afresh and if such an application is made the Executive Magistrate may after conducting due inquiry decide the matter afresh and in accordance with law. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (S. S. SHINDE, J.)