Ajay Shivaji Shinde v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4770 OF 2019 Ajay s/o Shivaji Shinde, Age: 21 years, Occu: Education, R/o Kasba Galli, Pishor, Tal. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 2.

The Member-Secretary, Scheduled Tribe Verification Committee, Behind St. Lawrence English School, Cidco, N-2, Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS Mr A. R. Salve, Advocate for petitioner;

Mrs V. N. Patil-Jadhav, A.G.P. for respondents CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ.

DATE : 25th April, 2019 ORAL ORDER:

Heard Mr Salve, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

(2) 2.

As the petitioner is before this Court with a limited prayer in the nature of directions to respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee to decide the tribe claim which is pending before it since year 2012, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition at this stage. 3.

The petitioner is prosecuting his school education in a private military school at Aurangabad. His claim of validation of caste certificate is forwarded to the Scrutiny Committee in the year 2012. A copy of forwarding letter under the signature of Head master is placed on record at Exh.'B'.

4.

The submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is possessing sufficient documentary proof to establish his claim in the form of validity certificates issued in favour of his close blood relations including his father and uncle and as such, the petitioner is hopeful of a positive decision in his favour. It is further submitted that as the petitioner is desirous to prosecute further studies, he is in need of appropriate validity certificate. 5.

In view of aforesaid submissions of learned Counsel for the petitioner and the grievance of the petitioner referred to above, issue notice to respondents, returnable forthwith.

(3) 6.

Learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader waives service of notice for respondents.

7.

Respondent No.2 is directed to decide the claim of the petitioner pending before it since year 2012, as expeditiously as possible and not later than sixteen weeks from the date of receipt of the order of this Court.

The petition is disposed of accordingly with aforesaid directions. (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) sjk