KUM. SHRUTI NIVARUTTI HAINALKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mrs.Gavhane, learned A.G.P. waives service for the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4. Mr.Sameer Khedekar, learned counsel waives service for the respondent no.3. By consent of parties, writ petition is heard finally.

(2.) By this petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have impugned the order dtd. 09/12/2021 passed by the respondent no.2 committee invalidating the caste claim of the petitioners which was issued by the respondent no.4 competent authority.

(3.) The petitioners have impugned the order on various grounds. Learned counsel for the petitioners however invited our attention to the Vigilance Report signed by Mr.S.A.Patil who was one of the member of the caste scrutiny committee. It is contended that the said Mr.S.A.Patil once having been appointed as a Vigilance Officer and has submitted report in the same matter, could not have been part of the Caste Scrutiny Committee. Learned counsel submits that in view of this admitted position, the entire order passed by the caste scrutiny committee is nullity and deserves to be quashed and set aside.