Remanded

Shri. Madhukar Tryambak Sonwane v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Tribal Development and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Apr 2014WP/1383/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court, by consent, disposed of a writ petition alleging errors by a Scrutiny Committee regarding Scheduled Tribe status claims for Thakur community. The Court referred to a recent common judgment on similar facts and quashed the impugned order, remanding the matter for reconsideration with liberty to add evidence.

What did the court decide?

Order of Scrutiny Committee dated 31.10.2012 quashed and set aside; matter remanded for reconsideration; liberty to file additional evidence granted; parties directed to appear on 19th May 2014.

Shri. Madhukar Tryambak Sonwane Vs the State of… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

skc

¶2

WP-1383-13

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1383 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 624 OF 2013

¶5

Madhukar S/o. Tryambak Sonwane .. Petitioner

¶6

vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

¶8

Mr. Anil S. Golegaonkar for Petitioner. Ms M. S. Bane - “B” Panel for Respondent – State.

¶9

CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA AND

¶10

M. S. SONAK, JJ.

¶11

DATE: April 25, 2014

¶12

JUDGMENT :-

¶13

1] Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally, by consent of the parties.

¶14

2] The Petitioner who claims to belong to a Scheduled Tribe

¶15

(Thakur, Thakar) filed this Petition against the order dated

¶16

31.10.2012 passed by the Scrutiny Committee.

¶17

3] In earlier Writ Petition No. 7343 of 2013 (Madhuri

1/4

skc

WP-1383-13

Nitin Jadhav Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) along with two

¶22

other connected matters on 26 February 2014, by a common reasoned Judgment/order disposed of similarly situated Petitions with regard to the “Thakur” Scheduled Tribes claims and therefore, for the same reasons, as the facts and issues are similar i.e. “non-consideration of documents and evidence”, and wrong applications of law by the Scrutiny Committee on “affinity test/issue” “the area restriction-removal” and “the caste certificates of relatives” based upon similar wrongly framed issues, as the same goes to the root of the matter, we are inclined to dispose of the present Petition as it requires reconsideration of above issues, in the following similar terms:-

¶23

ORDER

¶24

a. Order passed by the Scrutiny Committee dated 31.10.2012 is quashed and set aside.

¶25

b. Matter is remanded back to the Caste Scrutiny Committee, for reconsideration. The Scrutiny Committee to reconsider every aspect, by giving opportunity to all concerned.

¶26

c. Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to apply before

2/4

skc

WP-1383-13

the Caste Scrutiny Committee for filing additional evidence, oral as well as, documentary material.

¶31

d. The Petitioner/ parties to appear before the concerned Caste Scrutiny Committee on 19^th May 2014. Thereafter, the Committee to fix the date and programme accordingly with an endeavour to dispose of the matter as early as possible and in any case within six months from the date of receipt of judgment / order.

¶32

e. In case, Scrutiny Committee passes an adverse order against the Petitioner, the same should not be given effect to and/or acted upon for four weeks thereafter from the date of communication of the order.

¶33

f. All the parties to co-operate.

¶34

g. The interim protection, if any, granted by this Court

¶35

to continue until the decision and four weeks thereafter. No question of claiming any equities.

¶36

h. Rule is disposed of accordingly.

¶37

i. Civil Application is disposed of.

3/4

skc

WP-1383-13

j. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶42

k. The parties to act upon the authenticated copy of this judgment / order.

¶43

(M. S. SONAK, J.)

¶44

(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)

¶45

Chandka

¶46

4/4

Shri. Madhukar Tryambak Sonwane v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Tribal Development and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Madhukar Tryambak Sonwane v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Tribal Development and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jyoti Gopichand Ulkey and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, School and Education Dept and Ors.

Shri. Virsing Bhamata Pawara and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, School and Education Dept and Ors.

Smt. Chitrakala Mahadev Londhe Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Ministry of Tribal Development and Ors.

Shri. Madhukar Tryambak Sonwane Vs the State of Maharashtra, Department of Tribal Development and Ors.

Krantisingh Nana Pattil Ghauk Bhajipala Vypari Sangh and Anr. Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and Anr.

Amina Salim Makda Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.