GANESH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and the learned AGP finally.

(2.) The petitioner is challenging the order dtd. 16/12/2020 whereby the respondent no. 2 - Scrutiny Committee has rejected his claim as belonging to Mannervarlu scheduled tribe. Considering the fact that the petitioner has now appeared for the MAH-MBA-MMS-CET- 2023 and is aspiring for admission from reserved category, we have taken up this matter for final disposal.

(3.) The learned advocate for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's father has been issued with a validity certificate though the committee in the impugned order has expressed its intention to re-open the case to his extent for the reasons mentioned therein. Till date, not even a notice has been served to him, in spite of the impugned order having been passed 2-1/2 years ago. The petitioner cannot be made to suffer for the lapse on the part of the scrutiny committee. If the petitioner's father still possesses the validity certificate, the petitioner should get the benefit irrespective of any other reason.