Harshad Manmohan Pardeshi Through Its Guardian Manmohan Mansukh Pardeshi v. The District Collector Ahmednagar And Another

2025:BHC-AUG:31158-DB

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 972 WRIT PETITION NO. 1929 OF 2023 Harshad Manmohan Pardeshi Through Its Guardian Manmohan Mansukh Pardeshi

VERSUS

The District Collector Ahmednagar And Another ...

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Gandhi Amol S. AGP for Respondents-State: Ms. J. P. Reddy ...

CORAM

: R. G. AVACHAT & ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.

Dated : NOVEMBER 13, 2025 PER COURT : - 1.

Heard.

2.

The petitioners claim to belong to the Rajput Bhamta (Vimukta Jati) community. Their claims, however, have not been validated by the Scrutiny Committee. Hence, they are before us in this petition. 3.

The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were served with the Vigilance Cell Report. However, without affording them an opportunity to meet the adverse findings contained in the said report, the Scrutiny Committee reserved the matter for orders on the very same day.

4.

The rules mandate that a period of 15 days be granted to the concerned persons to respond to the adverse Vigilance Cell Report. Since this basic facet of the principles of natural justice has not been Page 1 of

972 WP 1929-2023 adhered to in the present case, we have no option but to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration.

5.

The Scrutiny Committee shall decide the matter afresh after giving the petitioners due opportunity to respond to the Vigilance Cell Report and to produce such material as they wish in support of their claim.

6.

In the aforesaid terms, the writ petition stands allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Scrutiny Committee to decide it afresh as directed above, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. ( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. ) ( R. G. AVACHAT, J. ) vj gawade/-.

Page 2 of