( 1 ) wp12486.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 903 WRIT PETITION NO. 12486 OF 2026 SHIVAM EKNATH JAMADAR VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS Mr. S.G. Bhalerao h/f. Mr. Y.R. Barhate, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Wani, AGP for the respondent-State. Mr. Rohit S. Sarvadnya, Sr. Panel Counsel for respondent Nos.5&6–UOI. CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATE : 16.09.2026 PC :- 01. Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner, learned AGP for the respondent-State and learned Advocate Mr. Sarvadnya for respondent Nos. 5 and 6. 02. This petition is mainly filed seeking direction to the Scrutiny Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner within stipulated period. The petitioner is desirous of taking admission to MBBS course from reserved category. For that purpose he obtained tribe certificate from Sub-Divisional Officer, Ausa-Renapur on 10.01.2026 as belonging to Scheduled Tribe. It is thereafter on 02.04.2026 the petitioner submitted proposal with respondent No.3 – Scrutiny Committee for verification of 2026:BHC-AUG:42586-DB ( 2 ) wp12486.26 his tribe claim. The petitioner, thereafter appeared for CET examination conducted for medical courses from the category of scheduled tribe. However, as per the case of the petitioner, abruptly his category came to be changed from scheduled tribe to open as he could not submit validity certificate. The petitioner is therefore before this Court for the relief of direction to the Scrutiny Committee to decide the claim of the petitioner and to direct respondent No.2 CET cell to maintain category of the petitioner as scheduled tribe. 03. Learned Advocate for the petitioner vehemently argued that category of the petitioner is changed from scheduled tribe to open without any information to the petitioner. The CET cell could not have converted seat of petitioner from scheduled tribe to open by showing remark as invalid CVC. As on today, there is no rejection of the tribe claim of the petitioner as well. It is also pointed out by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that there is already validity granted to his father and real uncle. He thus prays for allowing this writ petition. 04. Learned AGP and learned Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.5 and 6 opposed the prayer for direction to retain category. They submit that conduct of the petitioner shows that he approached the ( 3 ) wp12486.26 Scrutiny Committee late, when he was seeking admission to MBBS course. It is general knowledge that validity is required while making application for any admission or taking part in the admission process. The Government Resolution dated 10.12.2019 provides that a person desirous of taking admission to the professional course has to apply immediately after he takes admission to the 11th standard. It is for the institution thereafter to send the proposal before 30th November of that year, so that process can be completed within a reasonable time. He thus submits that the petitioner cannot blame the Authority for not completing validity proceeding as the petitioner himself approached very late to the Authority. 05. Learned Advocate for the petitioner during the course of arguments, relied upon order passed by Nagpur Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 6545 of 2026 dated 24.08.2026, order of this Court at Principal Seat in Writ Petition No. 11526 of 2026 dated 03.09.2026, order dated 04.09.2026 in Writ Petition No. 4410 of 2026 of Circuit Bench of this Court at Kolhapur, orders passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP (C) 31474 of 2026 and SLP (C) No.30636 of 2026. . Learned AGP and learned Advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 5 and 6 rely upon order passed by this Court dated 08.09.2026 in ( 4 ) wp12486.26 Writ Petition No. 11836 of 2026. 06. In the orders passed by this Court at Nagpur, Kolhapur and Mumbai, the Court allowed to take admission against reserved seat pending claim proceeding before the Committee. The Hon’ble Apex Court has passed interim order granting relief of admission. In SLP (C) No. 31474 of 2026 is only where the petition was preferred where order was passed by this Court by permitting to file review application. This Court, thereafter considered the review application and passed order in the Review Application No. 193 of 2026 by order dated 10.09.2026. This Court has considered judgment in the case of Dilip Vitthal Bambale & Ors. Vs. Vinitkumar Motiram Totlod & Ors., in Civil Appeal No. 11234-48 of 2017, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that grant of admission by way of interim relief is not advisable. From the orders of this Court at Nagpur, Mumbai and Kolhapur, it is seen that judgment in the case of Dilip Vitthal Bambale (supra) was not pointed out. Now it is well settled that in the matters of admission, no interim relief be granted. This Court has already dealt with the submission in order dated 08.09.2026 in Writ Petition No. 11836 of 2026 and also in the Review application. While entertaining writ petition, this Court needs to see conduct of the parties. To claim equitable or extraordinary relief, ( 5 ) wp12486.26 it is necessary for the petitioner to show that he has exercised due diligence. In the present case the petitioner made an application for the first time on 27.08.2025 and certificate is issued on 10.01.2026. He approached the Committee only on 02.04.2026. There is no reason coming from the petitioner as to when he was desirous of taking admission to medical course, why he did not immediately submit proposal after taking admission to 11th standard. There is also no explanation coming from the petitioner as to why he was late in approaching the Committee even after issuance of tribe certificate by the learned SDO. To expect at the fag end of the admission process every authority to work promptly is not possible. From all these reasons, this Court finds that looking to very short span remaining, it is not possible to grant any interim relief. 07. Learned AGP on instructions submits that even for completing validity proceeding, at least four months time is required as vigilance cell report is not received. 08. No case is made out on merit by the petitioner. Secondly, if such interim relief is granted, it necessarily deprives someone who is seeking admission to said course having validity in his hand. The person ( 6 ) wp12486.26 who approaches the Committee in time and obtains validity by showing due deligence, suffers because of such interim order. In case, the claim of the petitioner is invalidated, in such case even the petitioner suffers and loses admission, causing ultimate loss to the society. It is in this view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to grant interim relief. 09. Considering all the above, this Court finds that only relief that can be granted in this petition is to direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide claim of the petitioner within four months from today. 10. With the above, this petition stands disposed off. The respondent-Scrutiny Committee to decide tribe claim of the petitioner within four months from today. [JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [KISHORE C. SANT, J.] snk/2026/Sep26/wp12486.26