1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5787 OF 2009 1. Smt.Javadwad Shobha Ramesh, Age 40 years, Occu.Presently working as Assistant Teacher, Central Primary School, Chitegaon, Taluka Paithan, District Aurangabad 2. Daivshala Vitthalrao Jagtap, Age 42 years, Occu.Presently working as Supervisor, Integrated Child Development Service Scheme, R/o Gangapur, Taluka Gangapur, District Aurangabad 3. Smt.Jyotsna Kundansingh Gaherwar, Age 41 years, Occu.Presently working as Asst. Child Development Project Officer, R/o Paithan, Taluka Paithan, District Aurangabad 4. Smt.Anita Ganpatrao Tammadwar, Age 39years, Occu.Presently working as Supervisor, Integrated Child Development Service Scheme, Aurangabad, R/o Tq. and District Aurangabad .. PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. The Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad, through its Chief Executive Officer, at Aurangabad 2. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Aurangabad 3. Block Education Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Paithan, Aurangabad. .. RESPONDENTS Shri K.U.More, Advocate for petitioners Shri U.B.Bondar, Advocate for respondents 1 and 3 Shri U.S.Malte, Advocate for respondent No.2 2 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ DATE : 1st September 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER P.V.HARDAS , J ] 1. Deficit Court fees to be paid forthwith. 2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 3. We have heard Shri More, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Bondar, learned Counsel for respondents 1 and 3 and Shri Malte, learned Counsel for respondent No.2. It appears that the petitioners have been working with the respondents for a considerable time and though the petitioners had been appointed on reserved posts of Scheduled Tribe candidates, the petitioners had not taken any efforts for getting their claims validated by the scrutiny committee. It appears that the respondent – Zilla Parishad also did not initiate any steps for getting the claims of the petitioners validated. It appears that the respondent – Zilla Parishad has issued the impugned communications to the petitioners calling upon the petitioners to submit the validity 3 certificates within the particular period; failing which the services of the petitioners were liable to be terminated. The petitioners apprehending discontinuance of their services have rushed to this Court. 4. A similar statement is made before us by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the claims of petitioner nos.1, 3 and 4 have already been submitted before the scrutiny committee for verification and petitioner No.2 undertakes before us to submit necessary certificate to the respondent – scrutiny committee within two weeks from today. In the light of the aforesaid statement, we are, therefore, inclined to allow this petition. 5. We, accordingly, allow this petition and direct petitioner No. 2 to submit her claim before the scrutiny committee within two weeks from today. In order to ensure that the claims of the petitioners are adjudicated expeditiously, we direct the petitioners to appear before the respondent – scrutiny committee on 22nd September 2009 and direct the committee to decide the tribe claims of the petitioners within eight months of 22nd September 2009, in accordance with law. The impugned order to that extent deserves to be quashed and set aside. 4 6. We, therefore, direct the respondents not to initiate any action of terminating the services of the petitioners during the pendency of their claims before the respondent-scrutiny committee for their failure to produce the validity certificates from the committee. Further action, if any may be initiated by the respondents after the decision of the scrutiny committee. 7. Rule is thus made absolute on the terms indicated above with no orders as to costs. 8. Copy of this judgment duly authenticated by the Court Sheristedar be provided to the learned Counsel for the parties to act upon. ( A.V.POTDAR ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE vvr/5787.09wp 5