Allowed

Ritesh Jitendra Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others

Bombay HC17 Feb 2026WP/1783/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tribe claim / scheduled tribe certificate scrutiny: writ petition challenging disposal of petitioner's tribe claim by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Dhule (respondent No.2) for non-co-operation; order dated 19.11.2025 set aside; tribe claim proceedings restored to original position; fresh decision on own merits and in accordance with law within eight months; petitioner to appe

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed: impugned order dated 19.11.2025 of respondent No.2/Tribe Scrutiny Committee set aside; petitioner's tribe claim proceedings restored to their original position and directed to b

Ritesh Jitendra Thakur Vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

(1)

¶2

939 W. P. 1783-2026.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1783 OF 2026

¶5

Ritesh Jitendra Thakur, Age : 24 Years, Occ. Student, R/o. Police Head Quarter Building No.1, Room No.11, Dhule. ..PETITIONER

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

The State of Maharashtra, Through Principal Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

¶8

The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Dhule, Shindumanik S. No. 53, Opp. Ekvira Devi High School, Sharadha Nagar, near Vidya Nagar Devpur, Dhule

¶9

The Sub Divisional Officer, Erandol, Division Erandol, Dist. Jalgaon ..RESPONDENTS

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Kishor T. Shirrurkar AGP for Respondent/State: Mr. V. M. Jaware

¶11

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

¶12

DATED : FEBRUARY 17, 2026

¶13

ORDER:-

¶14

Heard.

¶15

By this Writ Petition, the petitioner is challenging the

¶16

order dated 19.11.2025 passed by the respondent No.2/Tribe

¶17

(2)

¶18

939 W. P. 1783-2026.odt

¶19

Committee, by which the tribe claim of the petitioner has been disposed of, due to non-co-operation from the petitioner, in deciding his tribe claim.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner will appear before the scrutiny committee on 26.02.2026 and will extend full co-operation in deciding his tribe claim.

¶21

Per contra, learned A.G.P. submits that the petitioner is negligent right from the beginning and did not co-operate with respondent No.2, as a result of which, respondent No.2/Tribe Committee was constrained to dispose of the tribe claim of the petitioner.

¶22

Be that as it may, since the matter pertains to the social status, we deem it appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to prosecute his tribe claim before respondent No.2/Tribe Committee.

¶23

In that view of the matter, we set-aside the impugned order dated 19.11.2025 passed by respondent No.2/Tribe Scrutiny Committee by restoring the proceedings of petitioner’s tribe claim to its original position and direct to decide the same, on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶24

(3)

¶25

939 W. P. 1783-2026.odt

¶26

The petitioner undertakes to appear before respondent No.2/ Tribe Committee on 26.02.2026. In peculiar facts and circumstances, we direct respondent No.2/Tribe Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and within a period of eight months from today.

¶27

(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) JUDGE JUDGE

¶28

YSK/

Ritesh Jitendra Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh Jitendra Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases