1 WP / 10914 / 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 906 WRIT PETITION NO. 10914 OF 2026 PRADNYA BHAURAO DHADE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS ... Advocate for petitioner : Mr. Mohanish V. Thorat AGP for the respondent – State : Mr. R.S. Wani Advocate for respondent no. 3 – Mr. Sachin V. Kuptekar ... CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATE : 25 AUGUST 2026 PER COURT : Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court, challenging the discrimination in Government Resolution dated 02.07.2026, thereby extending the time to submit the caste validity certificate by six months only to the candidates belonging to the SEBC and OBC category. The petitioner happens to be a person belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category. The grievance is that the Government decision grants time only to the SEBC and OBC candidates but does not give any extension to the persons from the Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste category. 2026:BHC-AUG:38796-DB 2 WP / 10914 / 2026 3. In case of SEBC and OBC, the persons can be admitted to professional course without producing the caste validity certificate. Six months time is given after the admission to submit the caste validity certificate. 4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner vehemently argued that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe category. Considering the difficulties faced by the persons of Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe category which are more than the persons from SCBC and OBC category. They need to collect more data and documents while SCBC and OBC candidates comparatively find it easier to get the documents. Even the place of residence of the Scheduled Tribe persons is remote from the towns and cities and that is the biggest hurdle. So far as the record is concerned, they find it difficult to collect the record also. Considering these aspects, he submits that time should be extended for persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. 5. He relies upon various judgments in support of his submissions in case of Ram Kumar Gijroya V. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Another reported in 2016 AIR Supreme Court 1098. He submits that the Hon’ble Apex Court, in said case, considered the object of giving benefit of reservation to the OBC category by considering the judgment in the case of Indra Sawhney V. Union of India reported in 1992 (Supp) 3 SCC 217 and another 3 WP / 10914 / 2026 judgment in the case of Valsamma Paul V. Cochin University and another reported in (1996) 3 SCC 545. 6. Learned AGP submits that for some period, there was confusion as regards the SEBC and OBC category, as to under which category, the student has to apply. It is only in that view, extension of time was given to SEBC and OBC category. In case of SC and ST category, there is no such confusion as to under which category they would fall. He relies upon the Government decision dated 10.12.2019 which expects a student to apply for caste validity certificate well in advance i.e. applications be filed prior to 30 September of the earlier year, so that he would get the certificate in time. It is submitted that it was for the petitioner to apply well in advance. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the petition. 7. In the present case, the petitioner has approached the Committee in May 2025 when he was studying in 11th standard. The petitioner had already prayed for direction to the Committee to decide the claim of the petitioner expeditiously. 8. This Court is conscious of the fact that this Court has directed the Committee in at least 1000 matters, to decide the caste / tribe claim of the petitioner/s within a stipulated period. However, the petitioner has approached this Court only in August 2026 and now 4 WP / 10914 / 2026 seeks extension of time to submit the validity certificate. The petitioner could have made such prayer well in advance. This Court already in Writ Petition No. 9388 of 2026, has negated the challenge by order dated 04.08.2022. This Court finds that no different view needs to be taken. This Court has considered the submissions and the judgments referred above. This Court has also seen the Government Resolution dated 02.07.2026. This Court does not find any discrimination in the matter of extension of time. 9. The petition can be disposed by directing the Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner within three (3) months from today. 10. The petition thus stands disposed of. 11. The Committee is expected to decide the caste / tribe claim of the petitioner within a period of three (3) months from today. [ JITENDRA JAIN ] [ KISHORE C. SANT] JUDGE JUDGE arp/