Pranita Maroti Sangapwad v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others
2024:BHC-AUG:30485-DB *1*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.616 OF 2022 YOGESH RAMESH SANGAPWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
AND WRIT PETITION NO.653 OF 2022 PRANITA MAROTI SANGAPWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Shri S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Ruchir S. Wani, AGP for the respondents/State. ...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, JJ.
DATE : 18th December, 2024 Per Court ( Prafulla S. Khubalkar, J.
):- Heard finally by consent of the parties.
2.
In both these petitions, the petitioners challenge the common order dated 15.12.2021 passed by respondent No.2/ Scheduled Tribe Certificates Scrutiny Committee thereby, invalidating their claim of belonging to 'Mannervarlu', Scheduled Tribe.
*2* 3.
Amongst other submissions, one of the submissions of the learned advocate for the petitioners is that the impugned order is common order in the matters of eight persons who are closely related to the petitioners. It is pointed out that separate Writ Petitions were filed by some of these persons and by separate orders passed by this Court, their writ petitions were allowed and the impugned order was quashed and set aside to their extent directing the Scrutiny Committee to issue validity certificates in their favour. In support of this submission, the petitioners have filed on record the order dated 18.01.2022 in Writ Petition No.663/2022 (Vitthal Ganpatrao Sangapwad vs. The State of Maharashtra and others), order dated 21.01.2022 in Writ Petition No.1128/2022 (Sachin Ashokrao Sangapwad vs.
The State of Maharashtra and others), order dated 07.09.2023 in Writ Petition No.932/2022 (Pratiksha Ganpatrao Sangapwad vs. The State of Maharashtra and others) and the order dated 30.07.2024 in Writ Petition No.3202/2022 (Shubham Sambhaji Sangapwad vs. The State of Maharashtra and others). In all these orders passed by this Court, the impugned order passed by the Scrutiny Committee was subject matter of scrutiny and the same is quashed and set aside to the extent of the petitioners therein.
*3* 4.
The respondents do not dispute this position. 5.
Considering the orders referred above, the instant petitions also need to be decided on similar terms. Hence, the following order:- (a) The Writ Petitions are partly allowed.
(b) The impugned order dated 15.12.2021 passed by respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside to the extent of the petitioners.
(c) Respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee is directed to immediately issue validity certificates of 'Mannervarlu', Scheduled Tribe to the petitioners in the prescribed format. (d) These validity certificates would be subject to final out come of the matters of other validity holders to be reopened by the Scrutiny Committee.
(e) The petitioners shall not be entitled to claim equities.
(f) No order as to costs.
kps ( PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.) ( MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)