B.R. Gavai, J.

1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties. In the fact and circumstance of the case, we discharge the notice issued to the Managing Director, Indian Oil Corporation dated 20-6-2014. The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee dated 13-11-2013 thereby invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner and the order of termination dated 8-1-2014 passed by the respondent No. 2-Indian Oil Corporation.

2. Though the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order of the Scrutiny Committee, during the pendency of the petition, he has given up the challenge to the order of the Scrutiny Committee and restricted his claim in the petition only for grant of protection of his services on account of his long standing service.

3. Shri Manish Bhat, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 states that even the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Milind, 2001(1) Mh. L.J. (SC)], which has been followed by the Apex Court in the cases of Kavita Solunke vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 2012(5) Mh. L.J. 921 and Shalini vs.