1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Writ Petition No. 3342/2009 Nanda d/o Bhaurao Mandalwar, aged 36 years, Occupation: Service, R/o: Satyanarayan Layout, Wadgaon Road, Yavatmal. ... Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Adiwasi Vikas Bhavan, Giripeth, Nagpur. 2. The Deputy Director, Health Services, Akola Division, Akola. ... Respondents .... Ms. Pritee D. Rane, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. S.W.Deshpande, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mrs. Joshi, A.G.P. for respondent no.2. .... CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE & P.D.KODE, JJ . DATE : 09/09/2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER A.P.LAVANDE,J) 2 Heard Ms. Rane, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. S.W.Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Mrs. Joshi, learned A.G. P. for respondent no.2. 2. Rule. 3. By consent heard forthwith. 4. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 9.7.2009 issued by respondent no.2 terminating the services of the petitioner as staff nurse in Primary Health Centre, Babhulgaon, District Yavatmal. 5. The petitioner was appointed as staff nurse on the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe. The tribe certificate of the petitioner was referred to the Scrutiny Committee - the respondent no.1 for verification and there is no dispute that the proceedings are pending before the respondent no.1. In the mean time by order dated 9.7.2009 the respondent no.2 has terminated the services of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has not submitted caste validity certificate. 6. Ms. Rane, the learned counsel for the petitioner 3 submitted that the petitioner can not be faulted since it is the respondent no.1 who has to decide the validity of the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner and till the Committee decides the same, the services of the petitioner are not liable to be terminated. In support of her submission Ms. Rane has relied upon the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 25th July, 2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 6097/2004 in which in similar circumstances the order of termination has been set aside and the Committee has been directed to decide the tribe claim within a specified time. Mrs. Joshi, learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent no.2 submits that till date the vacancy arisen on the count of the termination of the petitioner has not been filled in. 7. In view of the above position and in view of the Judgment dated 25.7.2005 of this Court passed in Writ Petition no. 6097/2004 in which similar relief has been granted to the petitioner, we deem it appropriate to quash and set aside the order of termination dated 9.7.2009 issued by the respondent no.2 and permit the petitioner to join the services. The 4 respondent no.1 shall decide the claim of the petitioner expeditiously and in any case on or before 31.3.2010. The continuation of the petitioner shall be subject to the order that may be passed by the Scrutiny Committee. The services of the petitioner shall not be terminated on the ground that she does not belong to scheduled tribe till respondent no.1 takes decision and for a period of two weeks thereafter. 8. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE patle