Harshada Ajit Thakur v. State Of Maharashtra Thor. Its Secretary,Tribal Development Department

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4192 OF 2025 Harshada Ajit Thakur ....Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr.

....Respondents Mr. C.K. Bhangoji, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P. a/w Mr. S.B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondent - State.

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.

DATE : 25th MARCH, 2025 P.C. :- 1.

We have heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader on behalf of the Respondents. This is a case wherein, though the Petitioner's claim for validation is pending, we could have passed an order and granted her the Validity Certificate in the light of Apoorva D/o Vinay Nichale Vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1 Nagpur,1 and Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan (2010) 6 Mah.L.J. 401

Samiti Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others.2 However, propriety demands that the Committee should discharge its functions and complete the formality of delivering an order. 2.

Suffice it to say that the Petitioner's biological father Ajit and the biological brother of Ajit, namely, Nilesh, both sons of Laxman Thakar, were before this Court in Writ Petition Nos.2842 of 2018 and 2848 of 2018, for challenging their invalidation by a common order. This Court [ B.R. Gavai ( as his lordship then was) and Smt. Bharati H. Dangre, JJ.], delivered a judgment on 17th April 2018 and the claim of both, Nilesh and Ajit, were accepted. The Petitions were allowed and the Committee was directed to issue them the Thakar Scheduled Tribe Certificate within four weeks. 3.

In the light of the above, the law laid down in Apoorva D/o Vinay Nichale (supra) would be applicable. 4.

The learned Advocate for the Petitioner indicates from the Vigilance Cell Report that there is not a single document traced out by the Vigilance Cell which can be said to be an adverse entry as 2 AIR 2023 SC 1657

against the present Petitioner. As such, the law laid down in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti (supra) would also be applicable.

5.

Since the hearing on the Vigilance Cell Report is concluded, leaving the Committee to complete the formality of delivering a judgment, that we direct the Committee to deliver a judgment in the light of the above observations, on or before 30th April, 2025.

6.

With the above observations and directions, this Petition is disposed off.

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)