(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 7531 OF 2010 Radhabai w/o. Baburao Pingale, Aged : 58 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. Asardoha, Taluka : Dharur, District : Beed. .. Petitioner. versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 2. The Collector, Beed, District : Beed. 3. The Scrutiny Committee for Other Backward Class, Town Centre, CIDCO, Aurangabad, Through its Secretary. 4. The Village Panchayat, Asardoha, Taluka : Dharur, District : Beed, Through Village Development Officer. .. Respondents. (2) ....................... Mr. V.R. Dhorde, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1, 2 and 3. ........................ CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE : 9TH DECEMBER 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. Since no order, prejudicial to the interest of respondent no.4, is being passed, the service of notice, upon rule, on the said respondent is waived. 3. The petitioner, who has been elected as member of Grampanchayat Asardoha (Taluka : Dharur, District : Beed), against the seat reserved for candidate belonging to Other Backward Class and woman category, has approached this Court, making a grievance that the respondent no.3 / Scrutiny Committee has accepted her proposal for grant of caste validity (3) certificate. 4. It appears that the proposal of the petitioner, for validity of her caste claim has not been accepted by the respondent / Committee, on the ground that it was not submitted within a period of three months from the date of election. 5. We find that the prayer in the petition is innocuous one. Neither the proposal of the petitioner, for validity of her caste claim, is accepted by the respondent no.3 / Scrutiny Committee, nor it is considered on merits. Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice, that the proposal of the petitioner is accepted and decided by the respondent no.3 / Scrutiny Commitee. 6. In the result, the petition is allowed. (i) The respondent no.3 / Scrutiny Committee is directed to accept the proposal of the petitioner, for validity of her caste claim, and decide the same on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of three months from today. (ii) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent no.3 / Scrutiny Committee on 10th January 2011 and, as such, the (4) requirement of formal notice, by the Committee to the petitioner, shall stand waived. (iii) It is further directed that till the decision on the claim of the petitioner, by the respondent no.3 / Scrutiny Committee, and for a further period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the order, in the event, an order adverse to the interest of the petitioner is passed, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner on the ground of non-submission of caste validity certificate. 7. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ( R.M. BORDE ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp7531