(1) WP5319-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5319 OF 2010 Arun s/o Dagdu Madukar PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. A.S. Golegaonkar, advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State. Mr. A.G. Ambetkar, advocate holding for Mr.S.T. Shelke, advocate for the respondent No. 3. Mr. D.V. Soman, advocate for the respondent No. 7. ..... CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 15TH JULY, 2011 ORAL ORDER: 1. The petitioner has approached this Court against the order passed by the respondent No. 2 - Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, which has declared that the caste certificate issued in favour of the respondent No. 7 that he belongs to the "Beldar" caste is valid. 2. The petitioner and respondent No. 7 contested the elections to the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation. The respondent No. 7 was declared (2) WP5319-10 elected whereas the petitioner was unsuccessful at the polls. 3. Mr. Golegaonkar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, stated that the petitioner does not desire to press for a relief of prayer clause (E) which has been recorded in an earlier order dated 11th August, 2010. Accordingly, the petition has been dismissed in respect of prayer clause (E), which reads as under : "To restrain the Respondent No. 7 to work and seat as elected Member of Aurangabad Municipal Corporation from Ward No. 94 Bansilal Nagar, Aurangabad reserved for Other Backward Class category and he should not be allowed to act as a Member in the matter of attending Meetings and also to utilize the funds to which an elected Member is entitled pending hearing and final disposal of this Writ Petition." 4. We have now confined ourselves to the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee and the process it has adopted for passing that order. We have scrutinized several documents brought to our notice by the learned advocate for the petitioner which, in (3) WP5319-10 our opinion, prima facie indicate that the caste certificate issued by the Executive Magistrate in respect of respondent No. 7 appears to be incorrect. Apart from this, the Vigilance Cell report, which has been submitted, does not indicate that the enquiry was conducted as contemplated under the Rules framed under the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of issuance and verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000. The Scrutiny Committee has found the claim of the respondent No. 7 valid without giving any reason for the same. There is no indication in the order as to what persuaded the Scrutiny Committee to validate the certificate of the respondent No. 7. 5. In our opinion, the impugned order deserves to be set aside and the matter must be remanded to the Scrutiny Committee for deciding it afresh. 6. Accordingly, the impugned order at Exhibit-M to the petition is set aside. The Scrutiny Committee shall decide the issue as to whether the certificate (4) WP5319-10 issued in favour of the respondent No. 7 to the effect that he belongs to the "Beldar" (Nomadic Tribe) is valid. While doing so, the Scrutiny Committee will adhere to the procedure contemplated under the relevant Rules. The Scrutiny Committee shall hear both - the respondent No. 7 as well as the petitioner. The parties will appear before the Committee on 22nd August, 2011. The Scrutiny Committee shall decide the tribe claim of the respondent No. 7 within three months from that date. The petition is accordingly disposed of. [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] npj/wp5319-10