17-sr921WP.14943.2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 14943 OF 2023 Pintya Samsingh Vasave VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Others ---- Mr.A.T.Jadhavar, Advocate for petitioner Mr.B.V.Virdhe, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3 Mr.P.S.Patil, Advocate for respondent no.4 Mr.A.R.Syed, Advocate for respondent no.6 ---- CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. DATE : AUGUST 25, 2026 ORDER :- Pursuant to to the order passed by this court, an affidavit came to be filed by Shri.Rahul s/o. Virbhan More, Tahsildar Akrane, Dist. Nandurbar. The concerned authority deposed that pursuant to the directions issued by this court the authority verified the birth certificate issued in the name of Supriya Pintya Vasave. It is stated that the Block Development Officer submitted a report on 26.02.2024 that on verification of QR code of birth certificate of Supriya Pintya Vasave, it is seen that the document belongs to Supriya Pintya Vasave. In the affidavit-in-reply, the link obtained from the QR code is also provided which contains the complete details of Supriya Pintya Vasave’s birth certificate. Copy of the birth certificate and the extract from the birth 2026:BHC-AUG:38775 2 17-sr921WP.14943 and death registration data showing the name of Supriya Pintya Vasave are annexed with the reply. In view of this, with the last hope of success in the matter, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that on his personal verification the QR code is neither responding nor it could be seen. 2. Although learned advocate as also learned AGP have personally tried to verify the data produced on record from their mobile phones, sometimes the QR code is scanned however the link is not opened due to some technical glitch. 3. This court does not have any reason as to why a responsible Officer would furnish a false report to this court on oath. As observed above, the said affidavit-in-reply is also annexed with the print-out of the relevant extract of Supriya Pintya Vasave. On going through such record it appears that the date of birth of the child namely Supriya is recorded as 22.01.2016. The father’s name is shown is Pintya Samsing Vasave and mother’s name is shown as Savitabai Pintya Vasave. As such, it appears that the petitioner and his wife have begotten a child on 22.01.2016 namely Supriya Pintya Vasave. 3 17-sr921WP.14943 4. I am conscious to take on record the submissions made by Mr. Jadhavar, learned advocate for the petitioner that under the order passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Dhadgaon, on 02.06.2023 in Criminal Misc. Application No.118 of 2023 the name of Supriya Biya Vasave is recorded in the birth and death register maintained by the Gramsevak/authority. On query, he fairly submits that the application was filed by Biya Vasave i.e. said application was not filed by the present petitioner. May it be. 5. The thing is clear that this procedure itself was initiated by Biya Vasave post the objection raised by respondent no.6. Even for a moment if it is assumed that Biya Vasave has also a daughter by name Supriya, that itself does not brush out the record and the data which on oath is substantiated by the Tahsildar showing that a daughter namely Supriya Pintya Vasave has taken birth on 22.01.2016 and that her parents’ name is Pintya Samsing Vasave and Savitabai Pintya Vasave. In view of this, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the authorities disqualifying the petitioner. The Writ Petition stands dismissed. [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] ……….. KBP