{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3837 OF 2009 Kum.Suprabha d/o Shivdas Totawar Age-Minor, Occ-Education Through natural guardian, father Shivdas Sayanna Totawar R/o Degloor, Tq-Degloor Dist-Nanded PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee, Aurangabad Through its Deputy Director (R) 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Degloor Dist-Nanded RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.S.M.Vibhute, Advocate for petitioner Mr.V.H.Dighe, AGP for respondents No.1 and 3 Mr.U.S.Malte, Advocate for respondent No.2 ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, and A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] DATE : 30th July 2009 JUDGMENT (PER A.V.POTDAR, J.) : 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. {2} 2. By the present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner impugns judgment and order dated 26.02.2009 passed by the Scrutiny Committee confirming the order of the Sub Divisional Officer dated 19.09.2008 by which the application of the petitioner for issuance of a caste certificate was rejected. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. It appears that the petitioner had filed an application before the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor requesting for issuance of a caste certificate claiming that be belongs to Koli Mahadeo Scheduled Tribe . The petitioner has submitted various documents along with the application, including school leaving certificate and affidavit of the father of the petitioner along with extract of entries of service book in respect of the father of the petitioner. It appears that the Sub Divisional Officer has rejected the application of the petitioner by observing that there is interpolation in the school leaving register of the father of the petitioner. It further appears that the petitioner has challenged the order of the Sub Divisional Officer before the Scrutiny Committee, which also came to be dismissed by the Scrutiny Committee vide order dated 26.02.2009 thereby confirming the order of the Sub Divisional Officer. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that now the petitioner is in possession of a document i.e. caste certificate of the {3} father of the petitioner, issued by Executive Magistrate, Degloor. Admittedly, the said document was not produced before the Sub Divisional Officer. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to produce this document before the Sub Divisional Officer and requested to remit the matter back to the Sub Divisional Officer for consideration afresh. We feel that opportunity needs to be given to the petitioner to tender this document before the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, who, after examining the said document would consider the claim of the petitioner. Therefore, we allow this writ petition and quash and set aside the orders of the Scrutiny Committee dated 26.02.2009 and that of Sub Divisional Officer dated 19.09.2008 and remit the matter back to the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor for consideration afresh. We permit the petitioner to tender the document, copy of which is at page 22 of the writ petition before the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor within two weeks from today. The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor is directed to decide the application, if submitted by the petitioner along with necessary documents, in accordance with law, within a period of three months after submission of the same. 6. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] [P.V.HARDAS, J.] drp/wp3837-09