1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4771 OF 2009 Vanita Namdev Kamale. .... Petitioner. Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. .... Respondents. Mr. R. K.Mendadkar for the Petitioner. Mr. V. S. Gokhale, AGP for Respondent Nos.1,2 and 4. Mr. Vijay Killedar i/by Mr. Niteen Jamdar for Respondent No.3. CORAM: BILAL NAZKI and MRS.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATED : 1ST JULY, 2009. P. C.: Rule. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the respective respondents waive service of the Rule on behalf of the said respondents. 3. Considering the issue involved, by consent, Rule made returnable and heard forthwith. 4. The petitioner's case is that she belongs to "Mahadeo Koli" Community and as such entitled to a certificate of being a member of Scheduled Tribe. She obtained a certificate which was sent for scrutiny to respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 has rejected the claim of the petitioner. 5. Earlier the petitioner's brother was facing the same problem and he 2 had challenged the order of the scrutiny committee in this court. The Court on 18th February, 2008 declared that the petitioner in that petition belonged to Mahadeo Koli Community. The court on earlier occasion in that case had referred the matter back to the Caste Scrutiny Committee to consider the school record of the petitioner' s father. The High Court found the petitioner's father's school record revealed that he belonged to Mahadeo Koli and therefore, it allowed the writ petition. 6. Now, there is an anomalous situation, where there are brother and sister from same parent, the brother would be treated as a member of the Scheduled Tribe Community whereas the sister would be treated to be as belonging to an upper caste. The Committee has not considered the import of the judgment of this court in its order but has tried to explain the judgment of this Court in the light of the Supreme Court Judgment in the case of Raju Ramsing Vasave v/s Mahesh Devrao Bhivapurkar & Ors. reported in (2008) 9 SCC 54. Both these judgments needed to be discussed in the order by the Committee so that the Committee could frame an opinion and avoid a situation where a brother is able to take the benefit of being a member of reserved community and whereas a sister gets excluded. Since the Committee has not considered the import of the judgment of this Court, we feel that the impugned order cannot be allowed 3 to sustain. 7. In view of the above, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Caste Scrutiny Committee, which may after hearing the parties pass appropriate orders keeping in view the observations made herein above. 8. Rule made absolute in terms aforesaid. 9. The writ petition is, accordingly allowed. 10. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (MRS.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.)