1 W.P.No.6351/09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.6351 OF 2009. Smt.Deepmala d/o Shankarrao Allewlar @ Smt.Deepmala W/o Ganesh Tokwar. ... Petitioner. Versus The C.E.O., Zilla Parishad Latur and another ... Respondents. ... Mrs.Deshpande, advocate holding for Mr.Ajay S.Deshpande, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.R.P.Phatake, Standing counsel for Respondent No.2. ... CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL & : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 06.01.2011. PER COURT 1. The petitioner came to be appointed as Gram Sevak by Respondent No.1. The petitioner 2 W.P.No.6351/09 claims to be belonging to Rajgond community. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though she was selected for appointment in the year 2004, she was not offered an appointment as she did not possess validity certificate. The petitioner and others were offered appointment in the year 2008. 2. In the year 2009, Respondent No.2 issued a show cause notice to the petitioner requiring her to furnish validity certificate. The petitioner therefore, approached this Court by filing the petition on 14.9.2009, being aggrieved by an order passed by Respondent No.1 dated 8.9.2009 terminating the services of the petitioner as Gram Sevak on contract basis. 3. Learned counsel Mr.R.P.Phatake, submits that due to considerable pendency before the Committee,sufficient time is required for final disposal of the claim petition of the petitioner. 4. In the facts of the case, we direct the Respondent Committee to finally dispose of the 3 W.P.No.6351/09 Caste Verification claim by 31st October, 2011 on its own merits. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the Committee. As the petitioner's caste claim is pending, we further direct that the impugned order passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Latur, terminating the services of the petitioner by an order dated 8.9.2009, would not be operative and shall stand suspended till 31st October, 2011. 5. It is clarified that in case the petitioner's initial term of three (3) years service is over and the petitioner is not continued in the service by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Latur, then the order directing suspension of the impugned order would not be in operation. 6. With this direction, the petition stands disposed of. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (NARESH H.PATIL,J.) asp/office/wp6351.09 4 W.P.No.6351/09