1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4626 OF 2009 Shri Bhushan Pundlik Wankhede, Age 18 years complete, Occu. Student, R/o At present B-19/20, Lane No. 8, Upper Indira Nagar, Bibvewadi, Pune – 411037. ... Petitioner. Versus 1) The State of Maharashtra, Department of Tribal Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 through its Secretary. 2) The Scheduled Tribe Verification Committee, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar. 3) The Director of Technical Education, Maharashtra State, Mumbai as a Head & Chair Person of the Pravesh Niyantran Samiti, 305,3rd floor, Govt. Polytechnic Building, 49, Kherwadi, Aliyawar Jung Marg, Bandara (East), Mumbai. 4) Bansilal Ramnath Charitable Trust’s, Vishwakarma Institute of Technology, Bibewadi, Pune-411037 through its Principal. ... Respondents. 2 -------- Shri, Anil S. Golegaonkar Advocate for the petitioner. Shri, N.N. Jadhav, Assistant Government Pleader, for the Respondent No. 1 & 3. Shri P.S. Patil Advocate for Respondent No. 2. -------- CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & NARESH H PATIL,JJ. DATE: 18th SEPTEMBER, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER P.V. HARDAS, J.) 1) Rule. Rule Returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. We have also heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader who accepts the notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 & 3, and learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2, none appears for respondent No. 4 though notice is serve. 3 2) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ directing the respondent committee to decide the Tribe claim of the petitioner which is pending since last two and half years. The petitioner also prays for directions to the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 not to take any adverse action against the petitioner on the basis of the letter dated 19-6-2009 issued by the respondent No. 4 and to permit the petitioner to prosecute his studies in B.E.(Computer Science). 3) Un-disputedly the petitioner had got admission to the B.E.(Computer Science) course on the strength of the caste certificate issued to the petitioner as belonging to “Thakur” (Scheduled Tribe). The aforesaid certificate has been referred to the Scrutiny Committee and we are informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the proceedings are pending consideration with the Scrutiny Committee. In the light of the pendency of the 4 proceedings and since there is no material on record to indicate that the petitioner is responsible for the delay, we are inclined to allow this petition. 4) We accordingly allow this petition and direct the petitioner to appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 15-10-2009, and direct the committee to decide the claim of the petitioner as belonging to “Thakur” (Scheduled Tribe) within three months, if pending in accordance with law and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. During the pendency of his claim before the Scrutiny Committee, we direct the respondents not to cancel the admission of the petitioner and permit the petitioner to prosecute his studies in B.E. (Computer Science) course and to declare the result of the petitioner and permit him if eligible to take admission to the next class. The admission of the petitioner, however, shall be subject to the result of the decision of the scrutiny committee. The petitioner shall not claim any equities in law. 5 5) Rule is thus made absolute in above terms with no order as to costs. (NARESH H PATIL, J..) (P.V. HARDAS, J) sdm/4626.09