(1.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for parties, the petition is taken for final hearing.
(2.) The caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to Mahar - Scheduled Caste is invalidated by the Committee. Aggrieved thereby, the present Writ Petition.
(3.) Mr.Yadkikar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that entire record of the petitioner and his relatives records caste as Hindu Mahar. The School record of the petitioner records caste as Hindu Mahar. The School record of the petitioner's paternal aunt of the year 1952 records caste as Hindu Mahar. The learned counsel submits that even the vigilance is conducted. The School record has been found to be genuine and correct. It has also come on record that the parents of the petitioner nor the petitioner has undergone Baptism. The marriage of the petitioner is performed as per Hindu tradition. The marriage of the brother of the petitioner has also been performed as per Hindu custom. Only because the ancestors of the petitioner were buried and photo of Lord Jesus was found on the wall of the petitioner's house would not be sufficient to brand the petitioner as Christian or having converted to Christianity. Learned counsel relies on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of "Dipak S/o Yohan Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in, 2014 5 MhLJ 252", in case of "Sudam Ankush Randive Vs. State of Maharashtra and others" Writ Petition No.615/2012 (Coram : R.M.Borde and V.L.Achliya,JJ.) decided on 2.7.2014, in case of "Chaturbhuj Vithaldas Jasani Vs. Moreshwar Parashram and others reported in, 1954 AIR(SC) 236", in case of "C.M.Arumugam Vs. S.Rajgopal and others reported in, 1976 AIR(SC) 939", in case of "K.P.Manu Vs. Chairman, Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Community Certificate reported in, 2015 AIR(SC) 1402".