1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5181 OF 2010 Ashok S/o Vithalrao Bodhankar, Age : 38 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri U. S. Malte, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5186 OF 2010 Ambadas S/o Vithalrao Mande, Age : 40 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Kacharwadi, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner 2 Versus 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri P. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5187 OF 2010 Sugriv S/o Manohar Mande, Age : 34 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 3 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri P. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5188 OF 2010 Kashinath S/o Janardhan Mande, Age : 38 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri U. S. Malte, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. 4 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5189 OF 2010 Dashrath S/o Dadarao Nirde, Age : 38 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Mohajahgir, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri R. P. Phatake, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5190 OF 2010 Jalindar S/o Baburao Rajle, Age : 39 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Ambejogai, Tq. Ambejogai, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner Versus 5 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri P. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5204 OF 2010 Kisan S/o Gangadhar Ghorpade, Age : 42 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents 6 Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri R. P. Phatake, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5216 OF 2010 Rajabhau S/o Babasaheb Kamble, Age : 34 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Golegaon, Tq. Georai, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri R. P. Phatake, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5221 OF 2010 Shaikh Asaf S/o Shaikh Noor, Age : 40 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner 7 Versus 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri R. P. Phatake, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5223 OF 2010 Rameshwar S/o Gangaram Waghmare Age : 38 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director (R), Aurangabad. 8 2. The Chief Officer, The Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Beed, Dist. Beed. .. .. Respondents Shri Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri P. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. CORAM : P. V. HARDAS AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 17TH JUNE, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT ( PER P. V. HARDAS, J ) : . Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 02. Since the relief prayed for in these petitions is similar, they are being decided by this common judgment. 03. By these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners pray for quashing and setting aside the notice dated 22.05.2010 issued by second respondent and also pray for directing the Committee to decide the caste claims of the petitioners. The petitioners also pray for directing the respondent No. 2 not to take any adverse action during the 9 pendency of the proceedings before the Scrutiny Committee. 04. In the light of the fact that, the claims are pending before the respondent No. 1/Scrutiny Committee, we are inclined to allow these petitions. The only point i. e. urged before us by the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 for opposing the reliefs to the petitioners is that the claims are pending before the respondent No. 1/Scrutiny Committee. Since the claims are pending, we are inclined to allow these petitions and quash and set aside the impugned communication and direct the respondent No. 2/employer not to take any adverse action against the petitioners during the pendency of the proceedings before the Scrutiny Committee. We further direct the petitioners to appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 28.06.2010 and further direct the Committee to decide the proposals regarding the caste status of the petitioners within six months of 28.06.2010. 05. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ P. V. HARDAS, J.] bsb/June 10