PASHAMIYA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India lays a challenge to the order passed by the respondent scrutiny committee validating the caste certificate issued to the 6th respondent as belonging to Bagwan - Other Backward Caste.

(3.) We need not dilate much on the factual aspect of the case in the light of the submission which has been made before us by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondent Scrutiny Committee is a quasi-judicial authority and it is incumbent for the respondent Scrutiny Committee to give some reasons while validating the caste claim of the 6th respondent. It is urged before us that the order of the respondent scrutiny committee validating the caste claim of the 6th respondent is bereft of any reasons. We had accordingly asked Mr.C.K.Shinde, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Scrutiny Committee to make available for our perusal the record and proceeding. On perusal of the record and proceeding, it appears that no reasons whatsoever have been given by the respondent Scrutiny Committee. There has been no evaluation of the various documents submitted on behalf of the petitioner and 6th respondent. There is no appreciation of the report of the Vigilance Cell.