Shri. Sakharay U. Naik. v. State Of Goa, Thr. The Chief Secretary And 4 ORS.,

1 WP462-16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 462/2016 Shri. Sakharay U. Naik.

Son of Ulhas Naik, age 38 years, married, Occupation Advocate resident of H. No. 78, Patto, Ribandar, Goa.

......... Petitioner.

Versus

1) State of Goa, Through the Chief Secretary having office at Secretariat, Porvorim, Bardez, Goa.

2) Directorate of Social Welfare, through its Director, with office at Panaji, Goa.

3) The Scrutiny Committee for Verification for Caste Certificate, through its Chairman, with its Office at Department of Social Welfare, Government of Goa, Porvorim, Goa.

4) Deputy Collector & Sub-divisional Officer, with office at Collectorate Building, Panaji, Goa.

5) Rupesh Ravindra Halankar, son of late Ravindra Halankar, major of age, married, resident of H.No.75, Confrinchem Bhat, Patto, Ribandar, Goa.

........ Respondents.

2 WP462-16 Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S. Dhargalkar, Additional Govt. Advocate for the respondents No.1 to 4.

Respondent No.5 present in person.

CORAM :- F.M. REIS & NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ.

Date : - 04/05/2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER F.M. REIS, J.) Heard Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. S. Dhargalkar, learned Additional Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents No.1 to 4 and the respondent No.5 in person.

2.

Rule. Learned Additional Govt. Advocate waives service on behalf of the respondents No.1 to 4. Heard forthwith, with the consent of the learned Additional Govt. Advocate, as also the respondent No.5 party in person.

3.

Upon hearing the learned Counsel and respondent No.5party in person, the only grievance of the petitioner appears to be

3 WP462-16 that an application pending before the Scrutiny Committee with regard to the caste of the petitioner filed on 3rd June, 2014 has not been yet disposed of.

4.

Mr. Sagar Dhargalkar, learned Additional Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents No.1 to 4, upon instructions of the respondent No.2 who is present in the Court, makes a statement that such proceedings shall be finally disposed of within six months from today.

5.

Accepting the said statement of the learned Additional Govt. Advocate, we find that nothing will survive in the above petition, at this stage. Keeping all the contentions of the parties open, the above petition stands disposed of, accepting the said statement of the respondent No.2 who is present in the Court. 6.

Rule stands disposed of accordingly.

NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J. F.M. REIS, J. ssm.