B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.- On 17.4.2009, the learned Senior Advocates, as also the Government Advocate appearing for the parties have pointed out that as per orders of this Court dated 11.2.2009, the matter is to be disposed of finally at the stage of admission. Accordingly, we have taken up the matter at the end of admission board by making rule returnable forthwith.

2. Challenge in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 26.11.2008 passed by the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to Bhandari Naik Community and also to the report of the vigilance cell dated 18.9.2008 submitted by the Sr. Superintendent of Police, to the Director of Social Welfare, Panaji, Goa.

3. This is the third writ petition filed by the petitioner in same cause. The petitioner has contested election from Ward No. 8 of Socorro Village and has been elected as Member or Pancha of Village Panchayat. This Court has, on 18.12.2008, granted ad interim orders whereby the invalidation of his caste claim by respondent No. 1 Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Caste Certificate, hereafter "Scrutiny Committee", has been stayed.

4. These elections were held on 5.6.2007. The ward was declared as reserved for O.B.C. category on 5.4.2007, by way of corrigendum a by the State Government. The petitioner decided to contest said elections and approached Gomantak Bhandari Samaj (for short "Saman, an organization of Bhandari Naik community and the said Samaj on 11.4.2007 issued him a certificate mentioning that he belongs to Bhandari Naik Community, notified as OBC vide Goa Government Notification No. 13/1/97-SWD dated 30th June, 2000 and of Government of India, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment dated 16.1.2006. On the basis of the said certificate, the petitioner applied to the Dy. Collector and S.D.M. Mapusa i.e. respondent No. 2 in the present petition and the said authority granted him a certificate as belonging to OBC on 11.4.2007 itself. It is not in dispute that respondent No.2 is the competent authority for Goa for issuing such status certificates. The petitioner, then filed his nomination on 13.4.2007. Respondent No.4 who is opposing the present petition, a candidate belonging to OBC in that election raised objection to the said nomination paper disputing the caste claim of the petitioner. On 15.4.2007, the Returning Officer rejected that objection and the petitioner came to be declared elected on 7.5.2007.

5. Respondent No.4 then approached the Samaj and on 8.5.2007, the Samaj withdrew the certificate and issued communication to respondent No. 2 stating that the certificate dated 11.4.2007 issued by it was revoked and cancelled. On 18.6.2007, respondent No.2 issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner, mentioning these facts and requiring him to point out as to why action should not be taken for fraudulently obtaining OBC certificate from his office by misrepresenting and by suppressing the material facts. In this background, on 25.6.2007, the petitioner applied to the Scrutiny Committee i.e. respondent No.1 for verification of his caste claim. On 3.7.2007, the Government of Goa issued a communication to all the Dy. Collectors and S.D.Os. mentioning that they were expected to issue certificates as per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court and not on the basis of the socials status certificate issued by any organization. It appears that some instructions to the contrary were earlier issued on 15.9.2005 and by this communication. those were withdrawn. On 18.7.2007, the vigilance cell submitted the report to respondent No.1 Scrutiny Committee and on 25.7.1997, the Ex-Officio Joint Secretary & Director of Social Welfare issued a communication to the petitioner mentioning that the certificate issued by respondent No. 2 in his favour was duly verified by the Scrutiny Committee and there were no "adverse remarks" against him.

6. On 6.8.2007, respondent No. 4 then