IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2448 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders Datta Shivajirao More .. Petitioner V/s The State of Maharashtra and others. .. Respondents. ... Shri S.C.Yeramwar,Adv.for petitioner Mrs.A.V.Gondhalekar,AGP for Respdt.State. Shri R.P.Phatake,Std.Counsel for R.2. ... CORAM : B.R.GAVAI & A.A.SAYED,JJ DATE : 6/10/2010 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of learned counsel for parties, petition is heard finally at this stage. 2] By way of present petition, the petitioner impugns the order dated 5/2/2007 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Ambejogai, thereby refusing to grant caste certificate to the petitioner certifying that he belongs to Thakur Scheduled Tribe and the order dated 19/5/2009 passed by respondent no.2 committee thereby rejecting the Appeal filed by present petitioner. 3] The petitioner claims to be belonging to Thakur – Scheduled Tribe, applied for grant of caste certificate. The same is rejected on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce sufficient material. On the same ground, the Appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed. 4] The Division Bench of this Court to which one of us (B.R.Gavai,J.) was a party, had an occasion to consider the issue in Writ Petition No.1688/2009 on 24/3/2009. The Division Bench has held that the parameters which are required to be taken into consideration at the stage of grant of caste certificate and at the stage of considering validity of the caste claim, are totally different. At the stage of grant of caste certificate, the authority is only required to prima facie examine that there exists some material to show that the petitioner belongs to a caste/tribe to which he claims. A detailed scrutiny to prove that the claimant in fact belongs to such caste/tribe would be warranted only at the stage of considering claim of the candidate for issuance of validity certificate. 5] In the present case, we find that the petitioner has produced on record a document of his grand father pertaining to the year 1925 and also the caste certificates issued in favour of Akash Anant More and Rakesh Anant More issued by respondent no.3 himself. The said Rakesh and Akash are the sons of Anantrao who is real brother of the petitioner’s father Shivajirao. In that view of the matter, we find that there was sufficient material for grant of caste certificate to the petitioner. 6] In that view of the matter, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause “B”. We quash and set aside the order dated 5/2/07 passed by respondent no.3 and the order dated 19/5/09 passed by respondent no.2 and direct the respondent no.2 to grant caste certificate to the petitioner ,certifying that he belongs to Thakur-Scheduled Tribe. 7] Needless to state that anything observed herein shall not be taken into consideration by respondent no.2 while considering the validity to the caste claim of the petitioner. Petition disposed of with no order as to costs. [A.A.SAYEDJ.] [B.R.GAVAI,J.] umg/wp2448-10