Rohit Nimba Koli v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 932 WRIT PETITION NO. 6524 OF 2024 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1454 OF 2026 IN WP/6524/2024 ROHIT NIMBA KOLI

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS ...

Mr. Vivek Jadhav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.P. Sonpawale, A.P.P. for respondents-State. ...

CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.

DATED : 5 MARCH 2026.

Oral Order (Per Abasaheb D. Shinde, J.) :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.P. for the respondents.

2.

By this writ petition, the petitioner takes an exception to the order dated 19.01.2023 passed by respondent Scrutiny Committee by which tribe claim of the petitioner of belonging to "Tokre Koli" Scheduled Tribe, has been invalidated. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, relying on the documents annexed with Civil Application No. 1454 of 2026, submits that after passing the impugned order, the petitioner could trace out documents in the nature of an order passed by

(2) District Collector, Jalgaon purported to have been passed under Sections 36 ad 36A of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code as well as certain revenue record, which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, would support his case of belonging to "Tokre Koli" Scheduled Tribe.

4.

Per contra, learned A.G.P. would submit that admittedly these documents were not before the Scrutiny Committee when the impugned order was passed.

5.

We, therefore, find that in order to give one more chance to the petitioner to substantiate his claim of belonging to "Tokre Koli" Scheduled Tribe, the documents which are sought to be placed on record for the first time before this Court, needs to be considered by the Scrutiny Committee afresh and in that view of the matter, we are inclined to allow this writ petition partly by remanding the matter back to the respondent Scrutiny Committee. Hence, the following order.

ORDER

(i) Writ petition is partly allowed.

(ii) The impugned order dated 19.01.2023 passed by respondent No. 2 Scrutiny Committee is hereby quashed and set aside.

(3) (iii) Matter is remanded back to respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee to decide the same afresh, after considering the documents which are sought to be placed on record before this Court. (iv) The Scrutiny Committee shall ascertain genuineness of these documents, even by conducting a fresh vigilance cell inquiry.

(v) In peculiar facts and circumstances, we direct the respondent Scrutiny Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of 10 months from today.

(vi) With these directions, writ petition stands disposed of alongwith pending civil application. (ABASAHEB D. SHINDE) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) JUDGE JUDGE VD_Dhirde