Azhar Haidar Sayyad v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

2026:BHC-AUG:10476-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 505 OF 2026 Azhar Haidar Sayyad

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra and others Mr. D. B. Pokale, Advocate for petitioner Mr. Anup Nikam, Advocate for respondent No. 2 Mr. S. B. Narwade, AGP for respondent-State

CORAM

: Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi & Hiten S. Venegavkar, JJ.

DATE : 11th March, 2026 PER COURT :- 1.

Present petition has been filed for correction of caste in the school record. The petitioner submits that his caste is "Musalman" however, in the school record his caste has been wrongly mentioned as "Shahfakir" The petitioner has filed school leaving certificates of his father and sister in which the caste mentioned "Musalman". But, in the school record of present petitioner, his caste has been wrongly mentioned as "Shahfakir". Respondent No. 2 by impugned order dated 06.08.2025 rejected the application on the ground that the the petitioner is not taking education in the school. The petitioner is relying on the Full Bench decision of this Court in Janabai Himmatrao Thakur vs. State of Maharashtra and others, [AIR OnLine 2019 Bombay 1055]. 2.

We are coming across many such orders, in spite of the decision of this Court in Janabai Thakur (supra), stating that the applicant/petitioner is not taking education in the school and, therefore, the authority has no jurisdiction or power to make changes in the school WP-505-2026.odt

record. While allowing the present petition, we direct respondent No.1 to apprise the concerned authorities about the Full Bench decision of this Court in Janabai Thakur (supra) and not to reject the applications on the ground that the person is not taking education in the school. The interpretation in respect of Rule 26.4 of Secondary School Code has been interpreted by this Court and that interpretation is binding on all the authorities. Even after apprising the authorities by respondent No. 1, if we come across such orders, then this Court will consider such orders as contempt.

3.

With these observations, the writ petition stands allowed. 4.

Respondent No. 2 is directed to issue order and grant the proposal forwarded by respondent No. 3 bearing Outward No. 97/2025 dated 17.07.2025 in respect of change in the caste of petitioner in the school record within a period of 15 days from today. (Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.) (Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.) B. S. Joshi WP-505-2026.odt