Arya Bajrang Golmallu Under Guardian Bajrang Sopanrao Golmallu v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Tis Secretary And Another

WP/ 9810 / 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9810 OF 2023 Arya Bajrang Golmallu Under Guardian of father Bajrang Sopanrao Golmallu ...

Petitioner

VERSUS

1] The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

2] The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Kinvat, Head Office, Aurangabad Through its Deputy Director (R) ...

Respondents ...

Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar Addl.G.P. for the Respondents/State : Mr. P.S. Patil

CORAM

: MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

DATE : 09.08.2023 ORAL ORDER (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.):

Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner's tribe claim as belonging to Mannervarlu scheduled Tribe has been rejected by the order under challenge.

3. We have heard both the sides for a while.

4. Since the petitioner is aspiring to take admission through the ongoing NEET-UG-2023 process, we have taken up the matter finally at the stage of admission.

1/2

WP/ 9810 / 2023

5. Admittedly, this Court has granted validity certificate to several of the near blood relations starting from Ramdas Sopanrao Golmallu (Palekar) in writ petition no. 3962 of 1993, his son - Amey Ramdas Palekar in writ petition no. 11078 of 2022, one Rutuja Bajrang Golmallu who is real sister and cousin Shubham Baburao Palekar. In view of such validities in the family, apart from anything else, the petitioner being the blood relation from the paternal side is entitled to derive the benefit.

6. Hence the following order :-

ORDER

1) The writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The committee shall immediately issue tribe validity certificate to the petitioner as belonging to 'Mannervarlu' scheduled tribe in the prescribed format without adding anything. The validity shall be subject to the final outcome of the matters which the committee has decided to reopen. 2) The petitioner shall not be entitled to claim equities. ( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) arp/- 2/2