Rohit Nimba Koli vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Rohit Nimba Koli vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 19.01.2023 of respondent No. 2 Scrutiny Committee quashed and set aside; matter remanded to respondent No. 2 Scrutiny Committee to decide the petitioner's “Tokre Koli” Scheduled Tribe claim afresh after considering the documents newly placed on record, ascertaining their genuineness (including by a fresh vigilance cell inquiry), preferably within 10 months; pending Civil Application No. 1454 of 2026 disposed of alongwith.

Issue for consideration

Validity of the petitioner's tribe claim of belonging to “Tokre Koli” Scheduled Tribe, challenged against the Scrutiny Committee's order dated 19.01.2023 invalidating it. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

In order to give the petitioner one more chance to substantiate his claim of belonging to “Tokre Koli” Scheduled Tribe, the documents sought to be placed on record for the first time before this Court need to be considered by the Scrutiny Committee afresh.

Key takeaways

On that view, the Court was inclined to allow the writ petition partly by remanding the matter back to the respondent Scrutiny Committee.ratio¶20
The impugned order dated 19.01.2023 passed by respondent No. 2 Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside.ratio¶23
The matter is remanded back to respondent No. 2 Scrutiny Committee to decide the same afresh, after considering the documents which are sought to be placed on record before this Court.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench; oral order per Abasaheb D. Shinde, J. (bench: Sandipkumar C. More and Abasaheb D. Shinde, JJ.), dated 5 March 2026. Rohit Nimba Koli's writ petition against the Scrutiny Committee's order dated 19.01.2023 invalidating his “Tokre Koli” Scheduled Tribe claim is partly allowed. After the impugned order, the petitioner traced new documents — an order purportedly passed by the District Collector, Jalgaon under Sections 36 and 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code and certain revenue records — which were admittedly not before the Scrutiny Committee earlier. To give the petitioner one more chance, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to respondent No. 2 Scrutiny Committee to decide the tribe claim afresh after considering these documents, directing it to ascertain their genuineness, even by conducting a fresh vigilance cell inquiry, and to decide the claim expeditiously, preferably within 10 months. Pending Civil Application No. 1454 of 2026 disposed of alongwith.

(1)

932 WP-6524.2024.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

932 WRIT PETITION NO. 6524 OF 2024 WITH

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1454 OF 2026 IN WP/6524/2024

ROHIT NIMBA KOLI VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Mr. Vivek Jadhav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.P. Sonpawale, A.P.P. for respondents-State.

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

DATED : 5 MARCH 2026.

Oral Order (Per Abasaheb D. Shinde, J.) :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.P. for the respondents.

By this writ petition, the petitioner takes an exception to

the order dated 19.01.2023 passed by respondent Scrutiny Committee by which tribe claim of the petitioner of belonging to “Tokre Koli” Scheduled Tribe, has been invalidated.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, relying on the documents annexed with Civil Application No. 1454 of 2026, submits that after passing the impugned order, the petitioner could trace out documents in the nature of an order passed by

(2)

932 WP-6524.2024.odt

District Collector, Jalgaon purported to have been passed under Sections 36 ad 36A of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code as well as certain revenue record, which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, would support his case of belonging to “Tokre Koli” Scheduled Tribe.

Per contra, learned A.G.P. would submit that admittedly these documents were not before the Scrutiny Committee when the impugned order was passed.

We, therefore, find that in order to give one more chance to the petitioner to substantiate his claim of belonging to “Tokre Koli” Scheduled Tribe, the documents which are sought to be placed on record for the first time before this Court, needs to be considered by the Scrutiny Committee afresh and in that view of the matter, we are inclined to allow this writ petition partly by remanding the matter back to the respondent Scrutiny Committee. Hence, the following order.

ORDER

(i) Writ petition is partly allowed.

(ii) The impugned order dated 19.01.2023 passed by respondent No. 2 Scrutiny Committee is hereby quashed and set aside.

(3)

932 WP-6524.2024.odt

(iii) Matter is remanded back to respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee to decide the same afresh, after considering the documents which are sought to be placed on record before this Court.

(iv) The Scrutiny Committee shall ascertain genuineness of these documents, even by conducting a fresh vigilance cell inquiry.

(v) In peculiar facts and circumstances, we direct the respondent Scrutiny Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of 10 months from today.

(vi) With these directions, writ petition stands disposed of alongwith pending civil application.

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

VD_Dhirde