1 wp5886.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5886 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.9174 OF 2010 Shri. Deepak s/o Vasantrao Thakur, Age: 27 years, Occ: Service, R/o. Amalner Darwaja, Erandol, Tq. Erandol, Dist. Jalgaon. ...PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Department of Tribal Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 Through its Secretary. 2. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar Through its Member Secretary. 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Jalgaon Division, Jalgaon. 4. The Competent Authority & Director, Maharashtra State Council for Education, Research & Training, Kumthekar Marg, PUNE. 5. North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon Through Registrar, Bhambori, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon. 6. Khandesh College Education Society's College of Education, NAAC Accredited B+++ & C.T.E. M.J. College Campus, JALGAON-425 002. Through Principal. ...RESPONDENTS 2 wp5886.09 ... Mr. A.S. Golegaonkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.P. More, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Mr. R.P. Phatke, Advocate for respondent No.2. ... CORAM: SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 7TH APRIL, 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard finally. 2. The present petition has been filed to challenge the order passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar (For short, "the Scrutiny Committee") on 12-06-2009. The tribe claim of the petitioner has been invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee. It has based its findings on the report of the Vigilance Cell. 3. The report of the vigilance cell was 3 wp5886.09 submitted in respect of the petitioner as well as his brother Sandip. We have already considered the case of Sandip whose tribe claim was invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee in the Writ Petition No.5885 of 2009. 4. In our opinion, the reasons stated by us in our judgment dated 23-03-2011 in the aforesaid Writ Petition for discarding the vigilance cell report will apply to the present case as well especially since common vigilance cell report was prepared for both the petitioner and Sandip. We therefore set aside the impugned order passed by the Scrutiny Committee for the reasons set out in our judgment dated 23-03-2011 in the Writ Petition No.5885 of 2009. The tribe claim of the petitioner shall be considered afresh by the Scrutiny Committee. The vigilance inquiry will also be conducted again in accordance with law. The report of the vigilance cell shall be considered by the Scrutiny Committee while deciding the tribe claim of the petitioner. The Scrutiny Committee 4 wp5886.09 shall decide the petitioner's claim within three months from today. 5. Rule made absolute on the above terms. 6. In the light of the disposal of the Writ Petition, nothing survives for consideration in the Civil Application and the same is disposed of accordingly. sd/- sd/- [S.S. SHINDE, J.] [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] sut/Mar11/wp5886.09