← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/9878/2018disposed offdismissed for default

Saurabh Vasantrao Medhe v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2019-06-04Hon'Ble Shri Justice S V Gangapurwala,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Mangesh S. Patil3 pages

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 75 WRIT PETITION NO.9878 OF 2018 SAURABH VASANTRAO MEDHE ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS ...

Mr. Irfan D. Maniyar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. A. R. Kale, AGP for Respondents-State.

Mr. S. G. Karlekar, Advocate for Respondent No.3. ...

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATED : 04th JUNE, 2019.

PER COURT:- 1.

The tribe claim of the petitioner as belonging to the Koli Mahadeo, Scheduled Tribe is invalidated.

2.

We have heard Mr. Maniyar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kale, learned A.G.P. 3.

It is submitted that the petitioner is placing reliance on validity certificate issued to his father so also real uncle. According to the learned A.G.P. the Committee has reopened the validation proceedings in respect of validity granted to father of the petitioner and real uncle

(2) of the petitioner and the show cause notice is issued and reply has been filed by those persons. 4.

As the proceedings have been reopened, the order that would be passed in the matter of the father of the petitioner and real uncle of the petitioner would be relevant while considering the case of grant of validity in favour of the petitioner.

5.

As the matter has been reopened by the Committee with regard to the validity granted to the father and the real uncle of the petitioner, we also remit the present matter to the Committee to reconsider the same alongwith the matter that has been reopened in respect of the father and real uncle of the petitioner.

6.

In light of the above, the impugned order is quashed and set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Committee to be decided alongwith proceedings that are reopened in respect of the validity of the father and real uncle of the petitioner.

7.

Considering that the petitioner is a student and the reply has also been filed and show cause notice is also issued to the father and real uncle of the petitioner, the committee shall endeavour to decide it within a period of one month from the date of appearance of the petitioner. The

(3) petitioner shall appear before the Committee on 15.06.2019.

8.

Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

(MANGESH S. PATIL) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA) JUDGE JUDGE Devendra/June-19