Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23379 (BOM)

BALDEVSING GULABSING THAKUR v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

WP/7812/2020 · 2025-06-11

Shri Neeraj P Dhote, Shri R G Avachat

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

926-WP-7812-.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7812 OF 2020 Baldevsing Gulabsing Thakur ..PETITIONER VERSUS State of Maharashtra and Others ..RESPONDENTS .... Mr. M.A. Golegaonkar, Advocate for petitioner Mr. A.A.A. Khan, A.G.P. for respondents .... CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT AND NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ DATE : 11th JUNE, 2025 PER COURT : 1. The petitioner, who is working with Respondent No.4 as a Junior Clerk, claimed to be belonging to “Thakur” Scheduled Tribe. His claim was considered and rejected by Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee by order dated 27th October, 2020. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim of the petitioner and the claim of petitioner's daughter - Harshada belonging to the “Thakur” tribe was referred together to Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee and the committee by common order invalidated the claim of the petitioner as well as the petitioner's daughter. He submits that the 1 / 3 2025:BHC-AUG:14940-DB 926-WP-7812-.odt petitioner's daughter - Harshada had filed Writ Petition No. 7782 of 2020 challenging the very same order of Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee and this Court by order dated 12th September, 2023 partly allowed the said writ petition and directed Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee to immediately issue the tribe validity certificate to the petitioner’s daughter as belonging to “Thakur” Scheduled Tribe which was made subject to the decision to be taken by the committee. He submits that the petitioner being father of Harshada (petitioner in above referred petition), present petition is to be allowed. 3. Learned A.G.P. appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 do not dispute the factual aspect that this Court in the above referred petition, which was preferred by the petitioner’s daughter, had directed the Scrutiny Committee to issue tribe certificate to the petitioner’s daughter. He, therefore, submits that appropriate order be passed. 4. Considering the above submission and the fact that this Court had allowed the petitioner’s daughter’s petition, same course needs to be followed to the petition in hand. In view of the same, we proceed to pass the following order :- Writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The committee shall immediately issue tribe validity certificate 2 / 3 926-WP-7812-.odt to the petitioner as belonging to ‘Thakur’ Scheduled Tribe, which shall be subject to the decision to be taken by the committee in the reopened matters. The petitioner shall not be entitled to claim equities. ( NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. ) ( R.G. AVACHAT, J. ) SSD 3 / 3