JUDGMENT : Swapna Joshi, J. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the invalidation order passed by the Scrutiny Committee, Gadchiroli and prays to quash and set aside the impugned order, dated 4.3.2016 issued by the respondent no.2. 3. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Junior College under respondent no.7 with effect from 25.9.1996. The petitioner has secured her caste certificate of 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe community from the Executive Magistrate, Chandrapur. The proposal for verification of caste certificate of the petitioner was invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee by order dated 4.3.2016 on the ground that the petitioner failed to submit necessary documents before the Scrutiny Committee within the stipulated period. 4. Shri T. Rahul, the learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently argued that the petitioner was in extreme difficulty at the relevant time, therefore, she required more time to obtain the relevant documents to produce before the Scrutiny Committee, but she was not given opportunity to tender those documents and therefore, she could not prove her caste before the Scrutiny Committee. He further urged that as the petitioner's services will be affected for want of caste validity certificate, her case be considered sympathetically. The learned counsel seeks a remand of the matter to the Scrutiny Committee so as to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to tender the documents which could not be secured at the relevant time. Mrs. G.R. Tiwari, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos.1 and 2, contended that though sufficient time was given to the petitioner to produce the relevant documents, she remained absent before the Scrutiny Committee, hence no leniency be shown to the petitioner. After hearing both the sides and on a perusal of the record, it is observed that the petitioner is found to be somewhat lethargic in prosecuting the matter in respect of her caste claim before the Scrutiny Committee. We, however, take a sympathetic view, as the petitioner is in service and her caste claim is not decided on merits by the Scrutiny Committee. In our considered view, one opportunity can be given to the petitioner to prove her caste claim before the Scrutiny Committee in the interest of justice and in view of peculiar facts and circumstances. We, however, take a sympathetic view, as the petitioner is in service and her caste claim is not decided on merits by the Scrutiny Committee. In our considered view, one opportunity can be given to the petitioner to prove her caste claim before the Scrutiny Committee in the interest of justice and in view of peculiar facts and circumstances. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order : The writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned order dated 4.3.2016 issued by the respondent no.2 is hereby set aside. The Scrutiny Committee is directed to decide the caste claim of the petitioner afresh by giving her opportunity to tender the relevant documents. The petitioner to appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 20.12.2016. The Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner within 18 months thereafter. The services of the petitioner are protected till her caste claim is decided. 5. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.