← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/2610/2014disposed offdismissed for default

Dipalee Lahu Raut v. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nashik And Others

2020-01-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sunil P. Deshmukh,Hon'Ble Shri Justice B. U. Debadwar2 pages

1 2607.2014WP..doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2607 OF 2014 MANISHA LAHU RAUT .. Petitioner

VERSUS

SCHEDULED TRIBE CERTIFICATE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE, NASHIK AND OTHERS .. Respondents ...

WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2610 OF 2014 DIPALEE LAHU RAUT .. Petitioner

VERSUS

SCHEDULED TRIBE CERTIFICATE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE, NASHIK AND OTHERS .. Respondents ...

WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2634 OF 2014 ARCHANA LAHU RAUT .. Petitioner

VERSUS

SCHEDULED TRIBE CERTIFICATE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE, NASHIK AND OTHERS .. Respondents ...

Advocate for Petitioners : Shri Prashant N. Khedkar AGP for Respondent No.2 : Shri A.V. Deshmukh Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Shri S.M. Kulkarni ...

CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH & B. U. DEBADWAR, JJ.

Date : 15-01-2020 PER COURT :

1.

Learned counsel for petitioners states that, caste claims of the petitioners had been turned down, considering that Gajanan

2 2607.2014WP..doc certificate issuing authority was not having territorial competence. Said orders turning down claims have been subject matter of present writ petitions.

2.

So far as Writ Petition No.2607 of 2014 is concerned, learned counsel for petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner therein has already received caste certificate from a competent authority and the same is referred to Scrutiny Committee for verification and said proceedings are still pending. In view of same, Writ Petition No.2607 of 2014 is disposed of. 3.

Writ Petitions No.2610 of 2014 and 2634 of 2014 are filed by sisters of petitioner in Writ Petition No.2607 of 2014. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, states that as the petitioner in Writ Petition No.2607 of 2014, who happens to be their sister, has already received a caste certificate from a competent authority, they would adopt similar course in Writ Petitions No.2610 of 2014 and 2634 of 2014.

4.

In view of aforesaid statement, Writ Petitions No.2610 of 2014 and 2634 of 2014 also are disposed of. ( B. U. DEBADWAR, J. ) ( SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J. ) Gajanan