Chandrakant Tulshiram Padalwar v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS

(1) R. A. No. 93 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

Review Application No. 93 of 2008 (In Writ Petition No. 2653 of 2006) Chandrakant s/o. Tulshiram Padalwar, Age : 30 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. At post Eklara, Taluka : Mukhed, .. Applicant District : Nanded.

(Original petitioner) versus The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32, & 5 others.

.. Respondents.

.........................

Mr. A.H. Koralkar, Advocate, for the applicant. Mrs. M.B. Gangwal (Patni), Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 and 3.

Mr. K.D. Bade Patil, Advocate, for respondent no.2. ..........................

CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE & A.M. BADAR, JJ.

DATE : 24TH JUNE 2015 PER COURT :

1.

Heard Mr. A.H. Koralkar, learned Counsel for the applicant.

(2) R. A. No. 93 of 2008 2.

This Review Application is filed in respect of judgment and order passed by Division Bench of this Court, in Writ Petition No. 2653 of 2006. The petitioner came to this Court for challenging the judgment and order passed by the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, rejecting his tribe claim. The petition was dismissed after hearing the petitioner and other parties to the petition. 3.

The Review Application is filed on the ground that the petitioner's near relatives have secured tribe validity certificate. On this ground, this review is sought.

4.

The Writ Petition was decided on merits after considering all the aspects that were available then. Therefore, there is no reason for review of such order. Subsequent events does not really matter for reexamination of the entire case. 5.

Hence, the Review Application is dismissed.

( A.M. BADAR ) ( A.V. NIRGUDE ) JUDGE JUDGE ................................

Puranik/ RA93.08