(1) WP. 4605.2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4605 OF 2007 Yeshwant S/o Maroti Jelle PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. Anandsingh S. Bayas, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Addl. G.P. for the Respondent-State. Mr. R.P. Phatke, Advocate for the respondent no.2 ..... CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 30TH JUNE, 2011 ORAL ORDER:- 1. The petitioner is employed with respondent no.4. He claims to belong to the "Koli Mahadev"- scheduled tribe. The tribe claim of the petitioner was negated by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, by its order dated 23rd March, 2007. That order has been challenged in the present Petition. 2. The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the Scrutiny Committee has not (2) WP. 4605.2007 considered his paternal grandfather's school record, which was submitted on 12th February, 2007 to the Committee. He further submits that the impugned order does not reflect that the report of the Vigilance Cell has been considered by the Scrutiny Committee. 3. The document which the petitioner seeks to rely on was submitted to the Scrutiny Committee after the date of hearing which was on 31st January, 2007. However, the order has been passed on 23rd March, 2007. The fact that that the document was submitted to the Scrutiny Committee, cannot be denied as there is an acknowledgment from the Office of the Scrutiny Committee on that document. The acknowledgment is dated 12th February, 2007. In our opinion, the Scrutiny Committee ought to have considered this document as well since in any event the petitioner had submitted the same before the Scrutiny Committee passed the impugned order. 4. We are therefore remanding the matter to the Scrutiny Committee for deciding it afresh after considering all the documents, including the one (3) WP. 4605.2007 pertaining to the petitioner's paternal grandfather's school record. 5. The impugned order dated 23rd March, 2007 passed by the Scrutiny Committee is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Scrutiny Committee. The Committee will decide the tribe claim of the petitioner afresh within six (6) months from today. The petitioner shall appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 11th July, 2011 at 11:00 am. 6. Although, the respondent no.4 has been served, nobody appears for respondent no.4. We therefore direct respondent no.4 not to take any adverse action against the petitioner for not submitting the validity certificate for a period of six (6) months. Petition disposed of accordingly. Sd/- Sd/- [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] arp