BAPU Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri S.R. Barlinge, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri P.S. Patil, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny Committee. We also heard learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent No. 1.

(2.) IN this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside judgment and order dated 31st March, 2000, passed by respondent No. 2 - Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee invalidating the tribe claim of the petitioner for 'Tokre Koli' scheduled tribe.

(3.) RECORD shows that the petitioner was appointed as Junior Machine Operator with respondent No. 3 by order dated 18th April, 1998. He is being continued on the said post even after invalidation of tribe claim by virtue of the interim order passed by this Court. The petitioner is now giving -up the claim for 'Tokre Koli' Schedule Tribe and is only interested in service protection. We have carefully perused the impugned judgment of respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny Committee. There are no observations made by the Scrutiny Committee in order dated 31st March, 2000, in regard to fraud played by the petitioner while obtaining tribe certificate and/or fraudulently securing the benefit of the scheduled tribe while seeking appointment. We do not find that the petitioner had played fraud while securing the appointment or that he procured caste certificate by playing fraud. The claim of the petitioner has been rejected by the Scrutiny Committee not only on the basis of documents as also on the ground that the petitioner failed to pass affinity test.