1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.14 OF 2006 Sindhudurga Zilla Thakur Samaj. ...Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr. R. K. Mendadkar and Ms. H.K. Mandlik for the Petitioner. Mr. V. A. Gangal, Special Counsel with Mr. P.M. Patil and Mr. S. S. Deshmukh, AGP for the Respondents. ..... CORAM : KSHITIJ R. VYAS, C.J. & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. April 20, 2006. P.C. (Per Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) : This petition has been heard together with companion P.I.L. No.4 of 2006. Counsel are agreed that similar issues are raised. The first relief that has been sought in these proceedings is to quash and set aside a Government Resolution dated 7th December 2005 and a direction is sought for the appointment of judicial officers as Chairpersons of Scrutiny Committees. For the reasons which we have already indicated in the judgment delivered in the companion petition, this relief cannot be granted. 2 2. The second relief that has been sought is a direction to the Scrutiny Committee, the Third Respondent, to follow the law laid down by this Court in its judgment dated 14th September 2004 in Writ Petition 2068 of 2004. In this regard, it cannot be disputed that Scrutiny Committees are bound by the judgments of the Supreme Court and of this Court, in relation to the issues which arise before the Committees for decision. This position has not been disputed. In so far as the appointment of Research Officers possessing qualifications laid down in the Government Resolution dated 9th July 1998 is concerned, we have already issued directions in the judgment delivered in the companion PIL. No further directions are therefore, necessary and none are pressed. The petition accordingly stands disposed of. CHIEF JUSTICE Dr.D. Y. Chandrachud, J.