1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6149 OF 2010 Uttam s/o Ramchandra Kople, Age 42 years, Occ. Service, R/o Ambajogai, Tq. Ambajogai, Dist. Beed ..PETITIONER 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, Dist. Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS Mr S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for respondent no.1; Mr P.P. Dama, Advocate for respondent no.2; Mr P.S. Patil, Advocate for respondent no.3. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ DATE : 14th July, 2010 2 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. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner takes exception to the communication issued by respondent no.2, dated 14.5.2010, calling upon the petitioner to submit the caste validity certificate, failing which the services of the petitioner would be terminated. 3. The petitioner, who claims to be belonging to "Rajgond" - Scheduled Tribe, came to be appointed as Assistant Teacher by respondent no.2 against a seat which was reserved for Scheduled Tribes category candidates. The claim of the petitioner has been recently referred to the Scrutiny Committee i.e. in April, 2010. In the light of the fact that the claim of the petitioner is pending consideration with the respondent - Scrutiny Committee, we are inclined to allow this petition. We accordingly allow this petition and quash and set aside the impugned communication dated 14.5.2010, whereby the petitioner was informed that his services are being terminated for his failure to submit the validity certificate and direct the petitioner to appear 3 before the Scrutiny Committee on 4th August, 2010 and further direct the respondent Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner within one year of 4th August, 2010. In the meantime respondent no.2 shall not take any adverse action against the petitioner during the pendency of the caste claim solely on the ground that the petitioner has failed to produce the validity certificate. 4. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. ( N.D. DESHPANDE ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE amj/wp6149.10