Abhijeet Anandrao Mudgulwad v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

( 1 ) 1056 wp 9768.18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 1056 WRIT PETITION NO. 9768 OF 2018 ABHIJEET ANANDRAO MUDGULWA

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AD ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Vibhute Sunil M. AGP for Respondents/State : Mr. P.S. Patil ...

CORAM :

R.M. BORDE & MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE :

24.08.2018 P.C. :- The petitioner is desirous of securing admission to Bachelor of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry Course as against a seat reserved for Scheduled Tribes category.

2.

The petitioner claims that he belongs to 'Koli Mahadev' Scheduled Tribe and is in receipt of a certificate issued by a competent authority certifying accordingly. The petitioner has tendered a proposal for validation of the tribe certificate to the respondent no.2 scrutiny committee and the proposal is stated to be pending. Since the petitioner is required to submit the validation certificate to the admission authority on or before 12/9/2018, there is an urgency of processing the claim of the petitioner for validation of the

( 2 ) 1056 wp 9768.18 tribe certificate and in that regard necessary directions will have to be issued. 3.

The counsel appearing for respondent no.1 on instructions states that the matter has already been sent for vigilance cell inquiry and the report has not yet been received.

4.

In view of the peculiar facts of this case, we direct the respondent no.2 scrutiny committee to ensure receipt of the vigilance cell report expeditiously and to take decision on the proposal for validation of the tribe certificate and shall pronounce the final order as expeditiously as possible preferably by 10/9/2018. The petitioner shall cause appearance before the scrutiny committee on 27/8/2018 and as such no separate notice requiring his presence before the committee shall be necessary. The petitioner contends that he will not claim his entitlement to receive the vigilance cell report in observance of the time frame prescribed under the Rules and shall not raise such defence in the proceeding.

5.

In view of the directions as above, Writ Petition is disposed of. [MANGESH S. PATIL, J.] [R.M. BORDE, J.] mub