The Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the order dated 04.02.2012 passed by the Scrutiny Committee, and remanded the matter back to the Committee for reconsideration of all points.
Impugned order dated 04.02.2012 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Scrutiny Committee for reconsideration on all points.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
skc
WP-2296-12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2296 OF 2012
Vilas Babali Atak .. Petitioner vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. A. T. Gade for Petitioner. Ms S. S. Bhende – AGP for State Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA AND M. S. SONAK, JJ.
DATE: March 21, 2014
P.C . :-
2] The Petitioner who claims to belong to a Scheduled Tribe (Thakur, Thakar) filed this Petition against the order dated 04.02.2012 passed by the Scrutiny Committee.
3] After considering the averments made and also for the reason that this Court in the case of Madhuri Nitin Jadhav vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. [Writ Petition No. 7343 of 2013 & others] decided on 26.02.2014 already remanded back the matter for reconsideration basically of related issue of 'Thakar' Scheduled
1/3
skc
WP-2296-12
Tribe.
4] In view of this and in the interest of justice, we are inclined to allow this petition. The Petition is accordingly allowed. Impugned order dated 04.02.2012 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Scrutiny Committee for consideration, on all points.
ORDER
2/3
skc
WP-2296-12
as early as possible and in any case within four months from the date of receipt of judgment / order.
(M. S. SONAK, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
Chandka
3/3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the matter regarding Schedule Tribe status of the petitioner should be remanded for reconsideration by the Scrutiny Committee after a previous remand.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Madhuri Nitin Jadhav vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.Referred¶12
Madhuri Nitin Jadhav vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. [Writ Petition No. 7343 of 2013 & others]
Vilas Babali Atak
The State of Maharashtra
Ors.
Anoop V. Mota
M. S. Sonak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
