1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4540 /2007 Smt.Panchal Sunita W/o Kishan .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Ors ..RESPONDENTS .... Shri M.V.Ghatge h/f Shri B.G.Deshmukh,Advocate for petitioner Shri R.P.Phatake,A.G.P. for Respondent-State. .... CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL & N.D.DESHPANDE,JJ. DATE : 06/04/2010 ORAL ORDER : [PER PATIL,J.] 1] Heard. 2] The petitioner contested election of Panchayat Samiti, Nanded against a seat reserved for O.B.C. from Kamtha (Kd), Tq. & Dist.Nanded Division. It is contended that she came to be 2 elected from the said Division. The petitioner obtained caste certificate which was issued by S.D.O. Nanded on 16/1/1988. The petitioner claims to be belonging to Sutar, which is recognized as O.B.C. by the State Government which is enlisted at Sr.No.174. The Tahsildar forwarded caste certificate of the petitioner for verification to the scrutiny committee. The scrutiny committee invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner. This petition challenges the order passed by the Scrutiny committee. 3] The petitioner contends that she was resident of Adilabad in Andhra Pradesh. The caste is recognized as O.B.C. in the State of Andhra Pradesh as well as in the State of Maharashtra according to the petitioner. 4] The petitioner produced caste certificate issued in her favour, school leaving certificate issued on 3/8/1971 by Head Master of Sharada Bhavan School, Nanded in favour of her husband, school leaving certificate dated 19/6/1995 issued by Head Master, Mahatma Phule School, Nanded in favour of her son and school admission entry dated 5/7/1989 issued by Head Master, Zilla Parishad School, Nanded, in favour of her son. The petitioner also produced a bonafide certificate issued by the Head Master of the School on 29/5/2007 in favour of her brother. The petitioner started residing in the State of Maharashtra, after she got married. 5] The committee considered the evidence and found that the 3 evidence is not sufficient to validate the claim of the petitioner. The committee further observed that petitioner was resident of Adilabad, Andhra Pradesh and was not resident of State of Maharashtra on 13/10/1967. 6] Though we may not fully endorse the view of the Committee that petitioner ought to have led evidence in support of her claim prior to 13/10/1967 or she ought to have been resident of State prior to 13/10/1967, we will have to deal with the issue on the basis of evidence produced by the petitioner in furtherence of her claim. 7] The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter needs to be remanded back to the Committee in view of the casual approach of the committee. 8] From the evidence produced on record, and other material placed on record, we find that the petitioner failed to establish by leading cogent and reliable evidence having probative value in furtherence of her claim that she belongs to Sutar O.B.C. as recognized in the State of Maharashtra. It is true that the petitioner is a migrant to the State of Maharashtra. The certificate issued in favour of the near relatives of the petitioner do not establish petitioners caste claim. The petitioner failed to produce material evidence in support of her claim. Counsel for petitioner placed reliance on reported judgment 2007 (4) All M.R. 38, Smt.Radhabai Charansing Chavare V/s State of Maharashtra 4 and others. 9] In the facts of the case, the ratio of the judgment in the case of Smt.Radhabai cited supra, relied upon by the petitioner is not applicable. We place reliance on a judgment delivered by Full Bench of Bombay High Court reported in 2010 (2) M.L.J. 904 Shweta Santalal Lal V/s State of Maharashtra and others 10] In the light of the fact that the petitioner failed to lead convincing evidence in her favour to establish caste claim, we do not find this to be a fit case to remand the matter. Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. [N.D.DESHPANDE,J.] [NARESH H.PATIL,J.] umg/wp4540-07