Sainath Pandhari Pujarwad v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:11911-DB 947 WP NO. 5342 OF 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5342 OF 2025 SAINATH PANDHARI PUJARWAD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS ...

• Mr. A. D. Sonkawade, Advocate h/f Mr. Jayewar Sainath Gangadhar, Advocate for the Petitioner • Mr. S. V. Hange, AGP for Respondents/State ...

CORAM

:

MANGESH S. PATIL & Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

DATE : 23.04.2025 PER COURT :

.

The tribe claim of the petitioner as 'Mannervarlu' scheduled tribe is invalidated.

2.

Issue notice. Learned AGP waives service for all respondents.

3.

We have heard both sides finally.

4.

The petitioner's tribe claim has been dismissed by considering the vigilance enquiry report which was conducted in the matter of one Sahil Vitthal Pujarwad and Aditya Sainath Pujarwad, as is evident from paragraph No. 3 and 4 of the order under challenge. Meaning thereby that the same set of evidence was scrutinized by the committee while discarding their claims, this Court 1/2

947 WP NO. 5342 OF 2025 in Writ Petition No. 1785 of 2022 and Writ Petition No. 7775 of 2024 has quashed and set aside similar orders of the Scrutiny Committee discarding Sahil's and Aditya's claim respectively. After quashing and setting aside the order of the committee, this Court had held them entitled to have certificates of validity.

5.

The aforementioned circumstances demonstrate that a common set of evidence forms the basis for the committee to discard all the three claims and this Court has found such rejection unsustainable in law. We are saved from recording separate reasons much less arrived at some in compatible conclusion. 6.

Besides, there are few other orders of this Court holding the blood relatives of the petitioners held entitled to have certificates of validity.

7.

In light of above, the impugned order is not sustainable in law. The writ petition is allowed in terms of the reasons recorded by this Court in the matter of Sahil and Aditya. The committee shall issue certificate of validity to the petitioner, which shall be subject to the finality of the matters of the validity holders which the committee has decided to reopen .

8.

The petitioner shall not be entitled to claim equities. (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) jhs/ 2/2