IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9468 OF 2011 Kailas Pundlik Salunke ... PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. V.P. Patil, Advocate for petitioner Mr. V.D. Rakh, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. A.R. Nikam, Advocate for respondent No.4 Mr. D.B. Bhange, Advocate for respondent No.5. .... 2] WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7305 OF 2011 Amol Narayan Thakur ... PETITOINER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.S. Phatale, Advocate h/f. Mr. M.S. Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioner Mr. V.D. Rakh, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 4 Mr. A.R. Nikam, Advocate for respondent No.6 Mr. K.D. Bade Patil, Advocate for respondent No.3 3] WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8972 OF 2011 Sangita Ramesh Koli @ Sangita Hemendra Sapkale IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD ... PETITOINER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.S. Phatale, Advocate h/f Mr. M.S. Deshmukh Advocate for petitioner Mr. V.D. Rakh, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 5 Mr. M.S. Sonwane, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr. P.P. More, Advocate for respondent No.3. Mr. A.D. Manale, Advocate for respondent No.4. Mr. A.R. Nikam, Advocate for respondent No.6. *** CORAM: B.R. GAVAI & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED: 22ND DECEMBER, 2011 PER COURT : 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2] All the petitioners in this group have approached this court since the proposal of the petitioners for admission to Postal D.Ed. Course was not forwarded inasmuch as they were not in possession of the validity certificate, certifying that their claim of belonging to a particular reserved category was validated. 3] Undisputedly, all the applicants have submitted their proposal for verification of their caste to the respective Scrutiny Committees. The petitioners cannot be penalized due to the inaction IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD on the part of the Scrutiny Committee in deciding their claim. It is not in the hands of the petitioners, as to within how much time their claim should be validated by the committee. 4] Vide ad-interim orders, we had directed the Deputy Director, to forward the application of the petitioners for Postal D.Ed. Course and had further directed the Maharashtra State Council for Education and Research to admit the petitioner for the postal D.Ed. Course. 5] Learned AGP has placed before us the communication, vide which it has been found that all the petitioners have been found to be eligible for postal D.Ed. Course and that they have been admitted to the postal D.Ed. Course by the Respondents. 6] In that view of the matter, we allow the petitions in the following terms :- [i] The respondent Scrutiny Committees are directed to decide the claim of the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within six months from today. [ii] The petitioners, who are already admitted for Postal D.Ed. Course would be permitted to continue the Postal D.Ed. Course, appear for the examinations and their result should also be declared. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD However, the result shall be subject to the decision of the committee, on the claim of the respective petitioner, regarding validity of their claim. Rule made absolute in above terms, with no orders as to costs. [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [B.R. GAVAI,J.] GRT *****