Allowed

Mayur Sanjay Suryawanshi and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept. and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Sept 2019WP/8699/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed an application for speaking to minutes regarding a common order in a tribal claim verification process, setting aside the order to benefit both petitioner father and son.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; impugned common order set aside; Committee directed to issue certificates in favour of both petitioners within two weeks.

Mayur Sanjay Suryawanshi and Anr. Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

902-ASWP8699-19.DOC

¶2

Shephali

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8699 OF 2019

¶4

Mayur Sanjay Suryawanshi & Anr...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through Secretary,
Tribal Development Department & Ors...Respondents

¶5

Mr RK Mendadkar, for the Petitioners.
Mrs AA Purav, AGP, for Respondents Nos. 1 & 2-State.
Mr Sameer P Khedekar, for Respondent No. 3.

¶6

CORAM: S. C. Dharmadhikari &
G. S. Patel, JJ.
DATED:18th September 2019

¶7

PC:-

¶8

1.This application for speaking to the minutes deserves to be
allowed.

¶9

2.The impugned order was a common order passed while
scrutinising and verifying the claim of the father as also the son, the
Petitioners before us. At Exhibit “A” which is a copy of the
impugned order, there is a clear endorsement in the cause title that
the claim was of Mayur Sanjay Suryawanshi and Sanjay Shivdas
Suryawanshi. Sanjay is in service and Mayur is student. If Mayur is
a tribal in terms of our order, it cannot be that Sanjay is not. In fact,

¶10

Page 1 of 2 18th September 2019

¶11

902-ASWP8699-19.DOC

¶12

it is the converse. The father is a tribal and, therefore, the son.
Hence, once the common order is set aside by this Court , the
benefit of the same will accrue in favour of both the Petitioners.

¶13

3.The Committee to take the corrective steps and issue a
Certificate in favour of the father as well in terms of our order. That
is to be done within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of
this order.

¶14

(S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J)

¶15

(G. S. PATEL, J)

¶16

Page 2 of 2 18th September 2019

Mayur Sanjay Suryawanshi and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayur Sanjay Suryawanshi and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zenith Tins Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Zulekhabai Yusuf Ahmed Chunawala and Anr. Vs Noor Mohamed Adam Halai and 12 Ors.

Zulekhabai Yusuf Ahmed Chunawala and Anr. Vs Noor Mohamed Adam Halai and 12 Ors.

Birajdar Surekha Shivaji and Ors. Vs the Education Officer ( Primary) , Solapur Zilha Parishad and Ors.

Goradia Special Steels Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Directorate of Industries and Ors.

Kolhapur Mahanagar Palika and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.