SACHITANAND Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.

(2.) The petitioners are challenging the order passed by respondent No.2 on 15/12/2021 in respect of the tribe claim of the petitioners. By the said impugned order, the tribe claim made by the petitioners has been invalidated.

(3.) The petitioners are the relatives of each other. Petitioner No.1 is appointed as engineer by respondent No.3. Petitioner No.2 is appointed as Talathi by respondent No.4. Petitioner No.3 is appointed as Gramsevak by respondent No.5 and petitioner No.5 has been appointed as MRI Technician by respondent No.6. Their appointments are under the Scheduled Tribe category. They belong to Scheduled Tribe, "Mannerwarlu". The tribe claim of the petitioners was sent for validation to the scrutiny committee. The petitioners had produced various documents to support their claim. The research officer had conducted the inquiry and the vigilance report has been submitted. After the report was received, notice thereof was given to the petitioners. Accordingly, they had raised objections. Hearing had taken place, however, respondent No.2 scrutiny committee rejected the tribe claim of the petitioners. Hence the present Writ Petition.