: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6242 OF 2009 Smt. Meena Nilkanth Nandanwar ... Petitioner Vs 1. District Health Officer, Pune & 4 ors. ... Respondents Mr. V.V. Kanade with Mrs. Jai Kanade for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Deshpande for the respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. C.R. Sonawane, AGP, for the respondents No.3 and 4. CORAM: S.B. MHASE & R.M. SAVANT, JJ. DATED : 11TH AUGUST, 2009. P.C.: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, taken up for hearing. 2. The petitioner has been appointed in the year 1999 as a Junior Assistant in the Zilla Parishad. At that time, she was appointed as against a : 2 : reserved seat of meant for scheduled caste. However, the Scrutiny Committee did not validate her caste certificate. Thereafter, the petitioner now claims that she belongs to “Koshti” community which is Special Backward Class. The petitioner has relied upon the Government Resolution of 1995 (Exhibit-D) as also the Government Resolution dated 31st October, 1996, and stated that her services cannot be terminated in view of the said G.R.. Mr. N.P. Deshpande, the learned counsel who appears for the Zilla Parishad, Pune, states that the caste certificate of the petitioner as “Koshti” has been sent to the Scrutiny Committee for enquiry under section 6 of the Maharashtra Caste, Scheduled Tribes Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate (Removal of Difficulties) Act, 2000. Under these circumstances, we direct the Caste Scrutiny Committee-respondent No.5 that it shall decide the said claim of the petitioner within a period of 12 weeks after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and if the Vigilance Report is against the petitioner, the copy of the said report shall be served on the petitioner and the Petitioner will be given an opportunity to file her reply to the said report. The petitioner shall cooperate with the respondent No.5 for speedy disposal as directed by this court. We further direct the respondent-Zilla Parishad : 3 : not to terminate the services of the petitioner for a period of 13 weeks. 3. Petition is allowed by making the rule absolute to the aforesaid extent. (R.M. SAVANT, J.) (S.B. MHASE, J.)