S.S. Shinde, J.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of the parties, petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

2. This writ petition takes exception to the communication dated 20th January, 2011 by the District Programme Coordinator, Maharashtra Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme cum Collector, Aurangabad, thereby directing the Functional Officer, Maharashtra Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (for short, "MREG Scheme") cum Tahsildar, Sillod District Aurangabad and Assistant Functional Officer, MREG Scheme cum Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Kannad that, the persons who are local residents of concerned village are only eligible to be registered under the MREG Scheme and accordingly steps should be taken. It was further directed that, names of persons belongs to VJNT and whose names are registered under the said scheme, the said names should be deleted. It was further observed in said letter that, while giving work under the said scheme, it should be allotted only after ascertaining that, the concerned person is resident of said village. The petitioner-organization has prayed that, impugned communication dated 20th January, 2011 may be quashed and set aside and respondent No. 3 may be directed to allot job card and provide employment to the members of petitioner organization under the aforesaid scheme.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that, the petitioner is registered organization, mainly registered for agitating the grievances and welfare of the unskilled, unorganized labourers, who are from the tribal communities i.e. VJNT, Banjara, Wadar etc. It is the case of the petitioner that, members of the petitioner organization are mostly uneducated. Their names were registered under the old Employment Guarantee Scheme. The petitioner organization used to offer work to their members who are unskilled labourers. It is the case of the petitioner that, the Union of India promulgated and enacted the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005, (for short, "Act of 2005") which is having the main object to provide employment for enhancement of livelihood and security of the households in rural areas of the country by providing at least 100 days of guarantee wage employment in every financial year to every household whose adult member volunteer to do unskilled manual work. It is further case of the petitioner that, in response to the said Act, the State Government framed various schemes. The Government of Maharashtra has also framed scheme in the name and style, such as, Maharashtra Gramin Rozgar Hami Yojana 2005, the Mahatma Gandhi Gramin Rozgar Hami Yojna etc. (for short, "MGEG Scheme").

It is the case of the petitioner that, members of the petitioner organization are mainly tribal and not permanent residents of any particular village. They have to travel for livelihood from place to place. According to the petitioner, the restriction imposed by the impugned communication dated 20th January, 2011 that, only persons who are residents of particular village, their names should be registered under MGEG Scheme is arbitrary, discriminatory and would defeat basic purpose of the Act of 2005.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner submitted representation on 3rd November, 2009 to the Deputy District Programme Officer, Aurangabad and requested for issuance of directions to the concerned Village Development Officer for registration of the names of the members of the petitioner organization and for providing employment to them. The petitioner has also submitted representation to respondent No. 3 and also to other officers. However, by impugned communication, respondent No. 3, in stead of acceding to the request of the petitioner to provide work to its members, directed to delete their names and not to enroll the members of the petitioner. According to the Counsel for the petitioner, such directions are arbitrary and would defeat the object of the Act