1037-wp-7943-2023.odt (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7943 OF 2023 Suresh Rangnath Aher VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra Through Tribal Development Department And Others ... Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh, Senior Counsel i/b Mr. Pote Ketan D. AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. D.R. Korade Advocate for Respondent No.4 : Mr. Pranav Dhakne h/f Mr. A.N. Sabnis WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7964 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7946 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7957 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7944 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7949 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7956 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7947 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7963 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7945 OF 2023 ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATED : DECEMBER 18, 2025 PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh, learned senior counsel for the petitioners. 2. In all these petitions, a short issue was involved whether all these petitioners claimed to be considered as per Section 2(o) of Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (for short ‘the Act’). 2025:BHC-AUG:36927 1037-wp-7943-2023.odt (2) 3. Mr. Deshmukh, learned senior counsel pointed out the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer whereby the Sub Divisional Officer has recorded the findings that the petitioners are tribals and therefore, their case falls under Section 2(c) and not under Section 2(o) of the Act. Therefore, he submits that the matter needs to be remanded back to the Sub Divisional Officer to reconsider the same. 4. After going through the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, it reveals that the proceedings were initiated by these petitioners for permitting them to occupy the premises within the forest area. The tribals who are occupying the forest area, they are permitted to occupy the same and for that the authorities are required to consider their occupation earlier being tribals within the forest area. 5. The Sub Divisional Officer by observing that the petitioners had not placed on any record by showing that they are occupying the said area prior to 13.12.2005 and to that effect, no record was submitted and therefore, the Sub Divisional Officer rejected the same which is confirmed by the Sub Divisional Officer. Therefore, as the petitioners are tribals, therefore, the authorities are required to consider their cases in view of Section 2(c) of the Act. 6. In view thereof, the petitions are partly allowed. The order dated 05.10.2018 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer and order dated 02.02.2022 passed by the Additional Collector are set 1037-wp-7943-2023.odt (3) aside. The matter is remitted back to the Sub Divisional Officer to decide it afresh. 7. The Sub Divisional Officer is required to consider whether the petitioners cases are to be referred to the Village Level Committee to consider the same and if found that their cases needs to be referred, the Sub Divisional Officer is directed to refer the same to the Village Level Committee. The entire exercise to be done by the Sub Divisional Officer within a period of six months from today. 8. All points kept open. (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.) Mujaheed//