1 unreported IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.6744 OF 2009. Ramakant Sudhakar Thakur, Age 32 years, Occ.Service as Instructor, R/o Plot No.2(A), Laxminarayan Nagar, Near Dena Nagar, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon. ... Petitioner. Versus 1. Deputy Director, Vocational Education & Training Division, Nashik Division, Nasik. 2. District Vocational Education and Training Officer, Jalgaon Division, Jalgaon. 3. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification & Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar, through its Member Secretary ... Respondents. ... Mr.M.S.Deshmukh, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.K.G.Patil, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.R.P.Phatake, advocate for the Respondent No.3. ... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 25.03.2010. 2 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per P.V.Hardas,J.) 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to accord approval to the services of the petitioner as a full time Instructor with effect from 1.5.2007 and to pay arrears of salary from 1.5.2007 till date. The petitioner also prays for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the Committee to decide the Tribe Claim of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. 3. The petitioner came to be appointed in the year 2004 as a full time Instructor on the post which was reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidates as the petitioner's claim to be belonging to Thakur tribe which is recognised as 3 Scheduled Tribe. From the date of the appointment till 1.5.2007, full time approval had been granted to the service appointment of the petitioner and the petitioner had accordingly been paid the salary. Since the claim was pending before the Scrutiny Committee from 1.5.2007 onwards, no approval has been granted by the Respondents and consequently, the petitioner is not paid salary. According to us, the approach of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 is wholly unjustifiable. The petitioner can not be held responsible for the delay which has occasioned in the decision of the Tribe Claim by the Scrutiny Committee. In such circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to be given at least temporary approval till the Tribe Claim of the petitioner is decided by the Scrutiny Committee. All arrears of salary be paid to the petitioner within six (6) months from today. The petitioner be paid regular salary as and when due till the decision of the Tribe Claim. The petitioner shall appears before the Scrutiny Committee on 8.4.2010 and we direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide the Tribe claim of the petitioner, within 4 six (6) months from 8.4.2010. 4. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (P.V.HARDAS,J.) asp/office/wp674409