Shubham Sanay Sapkal v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary And Another

926-wp-11521-2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 926 WRIT PETITION NO. 11521 OF 2025 Shubham Sanay Sapkal

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary And Another ...

Mr. Yogesh R. Suradkar a/w. Mr. Suresh M. Kulkarni, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. P. S. Patil, AGP for Respondents/State ...

CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT AND ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.

DATED : SEPTEMBER 24, 2025 P.C.:

1.

After having heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned AGP at length, the learned Advocate for the petitioner came around to seek remand of the matter for de-novo enquiry. 2.

The petitioner before the Scrutiny Committee placed a very narrow genealogy, whereas during Vigilance Report a detailed genealogy was placed on record. It is true that the petitioner's father namely Sanjay has signed the said genealogy without any demur. During hearing of this petition it was however noticed that some of the validity holders are in noway related to the petitioners. The petitioner still claims to have blood relationship with them. One of them is namely Bhagwan Avchit Sapkal. He is from the branch of Ramji. It is also stated that there are some contra entries. According to the learned Narwade/

926-wp-11521-2025.odt Advocate for the petitioner, the learned AGP cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate since they claim that certain persons who hold validity are the blood relatives of the petitioners when others are not. Before this Court no factual matrix can be adduced or finding thereon could be rendered unless and until the Scrutiny Committee goes into it. If the petitioner is non suited here his all the doors may get closed at least for the time being.

3.

In the fitness of things therefore we propose to remand the matter back to the Scrutiny Committee to give the petitioner a full fledge opportunity to produce material in support of his claim. 4.

Needless to mention that the scrutiny Committee would decide the petitioner's claim on its own merit and even un-influenced by the observations made hereinabove.

5.

Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

[ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.] [R. G. AVACHAT, J.] Narwade/