Nitin Sureshrao Chitale vs the State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2026)

Nitin Sureshrao Chitale vs the State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for direct issuance of the tribe validity certificate declined; instead, Respondent No. 2 / Caste Scrutiny Committee directed to decide the petitioner's tribe claim within six months; employer(s) barred from coercive action until the claim is decided; petitioner to extend full co-operation; protection lapses on decision of the claim and confers no equities.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court can grant the petitioner a Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe validity certificate straightaway on the ground that his close blood relatives have been granted such certificates by this Court, despite his own tribe claim being pending before the Scrutiny Committee. +2 more

Court's answer

The power to issue a tribe validity certificate is vested exclusively in Respondent No. 2, i.e., the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee.

Ratio / Principle

Merely because this Court granted tribe validity certificates to the petitioner's blood relatives is not a ground for granting the petitioner a certificate in exercise of Article 226 jurisdiction, particularly as his tribe claim is already pending before Respondent No. 2 / Caste Scrutiny Committee.

Key takeaways

Considering the petitioner is in employment and apprehends termination, Respondent No. 2 / Caste Scrutiny Committee is directed to decide the petitioner's tribe claim as expeditiously as possible and in any case within six months.ratio¶20
Until the petitioner's tribe claim is decided, his employer(s) shall not take any coercive action against him.ratio¶21
The protection granted operates only until the tribe claim is decided, and the petitioner shall not claim any equities on the basis of this order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench), Bench of Sandipkumar C. More and Abasaheb D. Shinde, JJ. (09.01.2026), disposed of a writ petition by Nitin Sureshrao Chitale seeking (i) direct issuance of a Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe validity certificate and (ii) restraint on Respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 from adverse action or termination of services for want of a Tribe Validity Certificate. Holding that the power to issue tribe validity certificates vests exclusively in Respondent No. 2, the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee, and that certificates earlier granted to the petitioner's blood relatives cannot justify direct issuance under Article 226 of the Constitution while the petitioner's own tribe claim is pending before the Committee, the Court recorded that counsel restricted the prayer to an expedited decision. The Committee was directed to decide the tribe claim within six months; the employer(s) were restrained from coercive action until decision; the petitioner was directed to extend full co-operation; and the protection was expressly confined to the pendency of the claim, with no equities claimable thereon.

2026:BHC-AUG:976-DB

1 937 WP 242-26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

937 WRIT PETITION NO. 242 OF 2026

NITIN SURESHRAO CHITALE VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Mr. Sunil Mahadevappa Vibhute, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, AGP for Respondent-State

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

DATED : 09/01/2026

P. C. :

Heard.

In this writ petition, the petitioner has put forth the following reliefs:

“B) The respondent No.2 committee may kindly be directed to issue the tribe validity certificate of Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe to the petitioner, at earliest.

C) The respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5 may kindly be restrained from taking any adverse action against the petitioner and also from terminating the services of the petitioner for non-submitting the Tribe Validity Certificate of petitioner, as the tribe claim of the petitioner is pending before the respondent No.2 committee.”

2 937 WP 242-26

Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in light of the fact that the close blood relatives of the petitioner have been granted tribe validity certificates by this Court, the tribe validity certificate ought to be granted straightaway to the petitioner by this Court, we are afraid that such a course cannot be adopted.

We find that the power to issue a tribe validity certificate is vested exclusively in Respondent No. 2, i.e., the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee. Merely because this Court has granted tribe validity certificates to the blood relatives of the petitioner cannot be a ground for granting a tribe validity certificate to the petitioner in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, more so when the petitioner’s tribe claim is already pending before respondent No.2 / Caste Scrutiny Committee, learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, restricted his prayer for seeking a direction to Respondent No. 2 / Caste Scrutiny Committee to decide the petitioner’s tribe claim expeditiously.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in employment and apprehends termination of his services, we direct respondent

3 937 WP 242-26

No.2 / Caste Scrutiny Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within a period of six months from today.

Till the tribe claim of the petitioner is decided, the employer(s) of the petitioner shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner.

The petitioner shall extend full co-operation in the process of deciding the tribe claim.

Needless to state that the protection granted by this Court shall remain in operation only till the tribe claim of the petitioner is decided and the petitioner shall not claim any equities on the basis of this order.

With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

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

VS Maind/-