Allowed

Bhagwath Shankar Ambatwad v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC12 Jan 2021WP/370/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Division Bench quashed the Caste Scrutiny Committee's judgment invalidating the petitioner's Scheduled Tribe claim. Relying on allowed writ petitions of the petitioner's paternal relatives, the court directed the Committee to immediately issue a validity certificate for the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment quashed; Committee directed to issue validity certificate for the petitioner of "Mannervarlu", Scheduled Tribe.

Bhagwath Shankar Ambatwad Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

(1)

¶2

952-wp-370-2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
952 WRIT PETITION NO.370 OF 2021

¶4

BHAGWATH SHANKAR AMBATWAD ..PETITIONER

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS..RESPONDENTS

¶7

Mr. Madhur A. Golegaonkar, Advocate for the
Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. S. R. Yadav-Lonikar, AGP for Respondents-State.
Mr. Sudha Chintamani, Standing Counsel for
Respondent No.4.

¶9

 CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
 SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

¶10

 DATED : 12th JANUARY, 2021.

¶11

PER COURT:-

¶12

1.The tribe claim of the petitioner as
belonging to “Mannervarlu”, Scheduled Tribe is
invalidated.

¶13

2.Under the impugned judgment the tribe
claims of the present petitioner and one Ku. Swapna
D/o Narsinh Ambatwad are invalidated. Ku. Swapna
is from the branch of Bhujangrao, whereas the
present petitioner Ku. Bhagwati is from the branch
of Rajeshwarrao. The Committee has relied upon the
documents from the branch of Rajeshwarrao and
Bhujangrao while invalidating the tribe claims of
the petitioner and Ku. Swapna D/o Narsinh.

¶14

3.From the branch of Bhujangrao one Gayatri
D/o shivaji, Govind S/o Kishanrao and Avinash S/o

¶15

(2)

¶16

952-wp-370-2021

¶17

Kishanrao had also applied for validity
certificates of “Mannervarlu”, Scheduled Tribe.
The Scrutiny Committee invalidated the tribe claims
of these persons. They filed Writ Petitions before
this Court. Govind S/o Kishanrao filed Writ
Petition Bearing No.10515/2017 before Principal
Seat at Bombay. The Division Bench at the
Principal Seat at Bombay under judgment and order
dated September 28, 2017 allowed the writ petition
directed to grant validity to Govind.
Subsequently, Gayatri D/o Shivaji filed Writ
Petition bearing No.4892/2019 and Avinash S/o
Kishanrao filed Writ Petition bearing No.8204/2020.
The Division Bench of this Court allowed both the
Writ Petitions setting aside the judgment of the
Committee and directed the Committee to issue
validity certificate of “Mannervarlu”, Scheduled
Tribe to them.

¶18

4.The Committee has not disputed the
relationship of the petitioner with the validity
holders and the petitioners in the writ petitions
referred to above.

¶19

5.The Division Bench of this Court in case
of Apoorva Nichale Vs. Divisional Caste Scrutiny
Committee reported in (2010) 6 Mh.L.J. 401 has
observed that if the paternal relatives are granted
validity, the same would be a relevant
consideration.

¶20

(3) 952-wp-370-2021

¶21

6.In light of the above, for the reasons
recorded in the judgment of the paternal relatives
of the petitioners in Writ Petition No.4892/2019
dated 05th July, 2019, Writ Petition No.8204/2020
dated 14th December 2020 and at the Principal Seat
in Writ Petition No.10515/2017 dated December 28,
2017 the impugned judgment qua the petitioner is
quashed and set aside.

¶22

7.The Committee shall issue validity
certificate to the petitioner of “Mannervarlu”,
Scheduled Tribe immediately.

¶23

8.In case, the Committee is successful in
getting the judgment in Writ Petition
No.4892/2019, Writ Petition No.8204/2020 and Writ
Petition No.10515/2017 reveiwed, then the present
judgment would be subject to the decision of the
same.

¶24

9.Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶25

Devendra/January-2021

Bhagwath Shankar Ambatwad v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagwath Shankar Ambatwad v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

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

Sangita Gangadhar Kokane Vs State Election Commission Thr Tis Returning Officer and Others

Atharva Ganesh Pawar Vs Director Fof Technical Education and Others

Sakshi Rajendra Tahakur Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Another

Mukta Ram Budhware Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Neha Nandkumar Govindwar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dyandeo Eknath Shipalkar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others