1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6151 OF 2010 1. Prakash s/o Bhaidasrao Jadhav, Age : 40 years, occu. Services, R/o Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed, 2. Atmaram s/o Dagduji Wagh, Age : 40 years, occu. Services, R/o Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed 3. Nagorao s/o Sambhaji Battewad, Age : 40 years, occu.Services, R/o Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed ..PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary to Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Beed, District Beed 3. The Schedule Tribe Certificate Verification Committee, Aurangabad through it's Deputy Director (R) Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS Mr S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for the petitioners; Mr S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for respondent no.1; Mr P.P. Dama, Advocate for respondent no.2; Mr R.P. Phatke, Advocate for respondent no.3. 2 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ DATE : 14th July, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER P.V. HARDAS , J ] Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. The petitioners in this petition question the correctness of the impugned communication dated 14.5.2010 issued by respondent no.2, informing the petitioners that their services are being terminated for their failure to submit the validity certificate. 3. Undisputedly, the petitioners came to be appointed as Assistant Teachers on posts which were reserved for Scheduled Tribe category candidates. The claim of the petitioners is pending consideration with the respondent - Scrutiny Committee and in that light of the matter, therefore, we are inclined to allow this petition. 4. Accordingly this writ petition is allowed and impugned communication dated 14.5.2010 is quashed and set aside and 3 we direct the petitioner to appear before the Committee on 5th August, 2010 and further direct the Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioners within one year of 5th August, 2010. In the meantime, respondent no.2 shall not take any adverse action against the petitioners, during the pendency of the verification proceedings, on the sole ground that the petitioners have failed to produce the validity certificate. 5. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. ( N.D. DESHPANDE ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE amj/wp6151.10