1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION No. 3490/2010. Suresh Ramchandra Dhanore -VERSUS- The Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee and others. _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED : JULY 01, 2011. Heard Shri R.M. Bhangde, learned Counsel for petitioner and Mrs. Dangre, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents. Shri Bhangde, learned counsel fairly points out that on earlier occasion question was – whether petition needs to be registered as a Criminal Writ Petition in the light of the judgment of Division Bench of this Court reported at 1995 (2) Mh.L.J. 753 (Nagpur Cable Operators Association, Nagpur .vrs. Commissioner of Police, Nagpur and another). 2 Learned Additional Government Pleader however, invited our attention to the Division Bench judgment reported at 2006 [1] Mh.L.J. 308 (Surendra Hanmanloo Gandam .vrs. State of Maharashtra and others). We have heard the respective counsel. We find that in later matter in Writ Petition, Division Bench of this Court has found that mere failure by the candidate like petitioner to substantiate his caste claim, cannot be termed as equivalent to production of false caste certificate. We have also gone through the observations made in para no.19 of the said judgment. Here after perusal of the impugned order of the Scrutiny Committee dated 13.07.2010, we find that only because the Scrutiny Committee has found the caste of father of petitioner and other relatives recorded in other documents as either “Kunbi” or “Kurmi”, the direction to lodge a police complaint under Section 11[1] and [2] of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of 3 Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 has been issued. There is no discussion as to how the petitioner himself is instrumental in it. We therefore, find the controversy covered by the Division Bench judgment in case of Surendra Hanmanloo Gandam .vrs. State of Maharashtra and others (supra). Following that judgment, we quash and set aside the directions issued under Section 11 [1] and [2] of the above Act. Rest of the order is maintained as it is. Petition is thus allowed. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Rgd