294wp2035.11.odt 1 . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.2035 of 2011 (Subhash Ramkrishna Ravarkar .vs. Chief Executive Officer and anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Coram: D. D. Sinha and A. P. Bhangale, JJ. Date : 29/04/2011. Heard Mr. S.R.Narnaware, Adv. for the petitioner. This petition is directed against the order dated 31.1.2011 passed by the Education Officer whereby representation of the petitioner submitted pursuant to the order dated 16th September, 2003 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.1986 of 2002 came to be rejected. Following facts are not in dispute : That the petitioner sought appointment on the post of Assistant teacher from 'Kamar' Scheduled Tribe. The caste claim of petitioner was referred to the Caste Scrutiny Committee for verification, which was 294wp2035.11.odt 2 . invalidated by order dt.5.4.2002. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner earlier had filed Writ Petition bearing No.1986 of 2002, which was disposed of vide order dated 16th September, 2003. In para (iii) of the said order, the Court has observed thus : “ The petitioner is given liberty to make representation to the employer for protection of his service under Government Resolution dated 15th June, 1995. We observe that if such representation is made by the petitioner within two months from today, the employer shall take decision thereon expeditiously and preferably within six months from the date of receipt of such representation. “ The petitioner, thereafter, made a representation to respondent no.1, dated 15th October, 2003. The petitioner also made an application dt.10.1.2011 to respondent no.2 for reinstatement on the post of Assistant teacher, which came to be rejected vide impugned order dt. 31.1.2011. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the representation made by the petitioner pursuant to the decision of this 294wp2035.11.odt 3 . Court is still pending and is not still decided. Be that as it may, in view of the above referred facts, it is evident that the caste claim of the petitioner came to be invalidated; the petition filed against the said order of Caste Scrutiny Committee is dismissed; the petitioner's appointment, admittedly, is after 1995 and thereafter, the petitioner, obviously, cannot get protection of the Government Resolution dt. 15.6.1995. So far as the issue about caste of the petitioner is concerned, that stands concluded by the decision of this Court whereby the order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee was given finalty. In that view of the matter, no case is made out to show indulgence. Hence, the petition is dismissed. So far as the issue about representation submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the decision of this Court is concerned, it is not connected with the cause of action involved in the present case and therefore, it is not necessary for this Court to consider the same in the present petition. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE 294wp2035.11.odt 4 . jais