1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4223 OF 2007 Sarojana d/o Marotirao Padalwar, Age-24 years, Occu:Nil, R/o-At Post:Eklara, Tq-Mukhed, Dist-Nanded, Through Power of Attorney holder, Shri.Nagnath s/o Marotrao Padalwar, Age-32 years, Occu:Service, R/o-As above. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary to the Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, 2) The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Dist-Aurangabad. 3) The Education Officer (Primary), Member Secretary, District Selection Committee, Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur, Dist-Kolhapur. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.S.M. Vibhute Advocate for Petitioner. Shri.V.B. Ghatge, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. Shri.P.S. Patil Advocate for Respondent No.2. ... 2 CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 9TH AUGUST, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT [PER NARESH H. PATIL, J.] : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself. 2. The Petitioner challenges the order dated 12th April, 2007 passed by the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the caste claim of the Petitioner. The counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner placed reliance on two validity certificates granted in favour of cousin/near relatives of the Petitioner. The Committee failed in error in describing these relatives as distant relatives of the Petitioner. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Scrutiny Committee had called original record of 3 both the relatives of the Petitioner in whose cases the Scrutiny Committee granted validity certificates. The counsel submits that the basis for grant of validity was some documents relating to maternal side of the candidates and recent record produced by those candidates. The counsel submits that on the basis of these validity certificates, the Petitioner cannot claim any benefit. 4. We find that the Scrutiny Committee is required to look into the evidence led by the relatives of the Petitioner, in case they are, to whom validity certificates were granted. The Scrutiny Committee thereafter, shall consider the case of the Petitioner afresh and after hearing the Petitioner and going through the record of the Petitioner's case and the record of two other relatives, if they are, pass reasoned order, at the earliest. 5. For the reasons stated above, the 4 impugned order dated 12th April, 2007 passed by the Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The Petitioner shall appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 30th August, 2010 at 11.00 a.m. The Petitioner shall co-operate with the Scrutiny Committee in early disposal of his caste claim. The Scrutiny Committee shall dispose of the caste claim of the Petitioner within three months from 30th August, 2010, on its own merits on the available record, after hearing the Petitioner and going through the record of the case of two relatives of the Petitioner, if they are. . Rule made absolute on the terms indicated above. [K.K. TATED, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/AUG10/wp4223.07