JUDGMENT :

Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra, Om Prakash Tripathi, JJ.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

2. Sri Dr. Arjun Singh, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 6, has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition and submitted that the order impugned is an interlocutory order and the petition is not maintainable against such order. The petitioner should wait for final order to be passed whereafter a statutory remedy of filing appeal will be available before Divisional Level Committee.

3. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 08.06.2022 passed by the respondent no.2 District Level Caste Scrutiny Committee.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of a judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and Another vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and Others, AIR 1995 SC 94, where the Court has held that for examination of whether a candidate belongs a particular reserved category, the matter should be referred to the Vigilance Cell for conducting the inquiry for which it directed that eac