Shivaji Madhavrao Yamalwad vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

¶1

2026:BHC-AUG:7652-DB

¶2

1 51.WP.10618.25.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 10618 OF 2025

¶5

SHIVAJI MADHAVRAO YAMALWAD VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. G.K. Chinchole h/f. Mr. Thorat Chandrakant R. AGP for Respondents: Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 to 5 : Mr. H.A. Bajaj h/f.

¶8

Mr. A.S. Bajaj

¶9

... CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE & ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 16.02.2026

¶11

PER COURT:

¶12

Heard.

¶13

By this writ petition the petitioner is taking exception to

¶14

the impugned judgment and order dated 30.07.2025, passed by the respondent No.2 – Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee, Kinwat, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, by which the tribe claim of the petitioner of belonging to ‘Mannervarlu’ scheduled tribe has been invalidated.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner inviting attention of this Court to the genealogy would submit that the blood relatives of

¶16

2 51.WP.10618.25.odt

¶17

the petitioner namely Rajeshree Venkatrao Yamalwad whose tribe claim was invalidated had approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.65/2025, similarly, the other blood relatives of the petitioner namely Varad Shivaji Yamalwad and Shital Shivaji Yamalwad whose tribe claims were also invalidated had also filed Writ Petition No.10026/2025 and this Court by an order dated 11.08.2025 allowed the said writ petitions by directing the respondents – Scrutiny Committee to issue conditional validity.

¶18

Paragraph Nos. 5 and 6 of the said common judgment in the case of Rajeshree Venkatrao Yamalwad Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Anr. (WP No.65/2025 along with connected writ petition) reads thus :

¶19

“5. On face of record, it appears that on 09.08.2010, the Respondent No.2/Scrutiny Committee granted Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe certificate in favour of Shivaji Yamalwad. On 13.08.2024, this Court passed an order in Writ Petition No.11458/2019 (Shilpa Shivaji Yamalwad V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.) and directed the Respondent No.2/Scrutiny Committee to issue conditional Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe validity certificate in favour of the Petitioner therein, who is the real sister of Petitioner Nos.1 & 2 in Writ Petition No.10026/2025 and cousin sister of Petitioners in Writ Petition No.65/2025.

¶20

No doubt, as per the impugned order the paternal blood relatives who were having Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe certificates are served with notices for revocation of their validity certificates, however, as on today said validity

¶21

3 51.WP.10618.25.odt

¶22

certificates have not been revoked as till date no final orders have been passed.”

¶23

Per contra, learned AGP submits that if at all this Court is inclined to grant conditional validity, the same should be subject to outcome of the reverification proceedings initiated against those blood relatives on the basis of which the petitioner is deriving benefit. He would further submit that the Scrutiny Committee may be permitted to proceed against the said validity holders in accordance with law and after scrutiny if, the said validity certificates of the said blood relatives are invalidated, the consequences, being suffered by the said validity holders, would also befall upon the petitioner.

¶24

It goes without saying that since the petitioner is relying on the conditional validity granted by this Court in the case of Rajeshree Venkatrao Yamalwad and Anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra (supra) which admittedly is based on the validities granted by the respondent – Scrutiny Committee to some of the blood relatives whose validities are proposed to be reopened, the consequences suffered by the blood relatives, and other blood relative in whose favour the conditional validity has been granted by this Court, would befall upon the petitioner. Thus, we are inclined

¶25

4 51.WP.10618.25.odt

¶26

to allow this writ petition partly by passing the following order :

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

I. The writ petition is partly allowed.

¶29

II. The impugned order dated 30.07.2025 passed by respondent No.2 – Scrutiny Committee, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶30

III. The respondent No.2 – Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue tribe validity certificate in favour of the petitioner of belonging to ‘Mannervarlu’ scheduled tribe subject to

¶31

following conditions :

¶32

a) The validity certificate granted to the petitioner would be subject to outcome of the proceedings initiated by the Scrutiny Committee for reopening the validity certificates of the blood relatives on which the petitioner is placing reliance.

¶33

b) The consequences suffered by the blood relatives, whose validity certificates the petitioner and other blood relatives in whose favour the conditional validity has been granted by this Court, would befall upon the petitioner.

¶34

c) In view of the condition Nos.(a) and (b) the petitioner shall not claim any equity.

¶35

(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.)

¶36

habeeb/

Shivaji Madhavrao Yamalwad v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivaji Madhavrao Yamalwad v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shashikala Digambar Sudewad and Another vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Ravi Alias Revan Dashrath Katarnavare vs the State of Maharashtra

Mrs Leeladevi Sureshchandra Bakliwal vs The State of Maharashtra Through Urban Development Department

Gajanan Raghunath Bari vs Milind Mhaiskar The State of Maharashtra

Bhagyashree Sudhir Mathwale vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vikas Ratan Deore vs Ranjit Singh Deol