← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/12563/2025disposed off

Tanuja Tanaji Gaganbone And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

2026-02-09Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. Shinde2 pages

2026:BHC-AUG:6103-DB (1) 56- W. P. 12563-2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 56 WRIT PETITION NO. 12563 OF 2025 1.

Tanuja Tanaji Gaganbone, Age : 20 Years, Occ. Student, R/o. At Post Hasori (Bk) Tq. Nilanga Dist. Latur 2.

Vishnu Tanaji Gaganbone, Age : 19 Years, Occ. Student, R/o. At Post Hasori (Bk) Tq Nillanga Dist. Latur .. Petitioners

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Mantralaya Mumbai.

2.

The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Kinwat Head Quarter Chh. Sambhajinagar.

3.

The Commissioner and Competent Authority, State Common Entrance Test Cell, 8th Floor, New excelsior Building, A.K. Nayak Marg, Fort, Mumbai - 400 001 4.

The Principal, Pimpri Chinchwad College of Engineering, Sector 26 Pradhikar, Nigdi, Pune 411 044 ...

Advocate for the Petitioners : Adv. Sonali G. Somwanshi h/f Mr. A.S. Bayas Adv. Abdulla Shaikh AGP for Respondent/State: Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya ....

CORAM :

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

DATED : FEBRUARY 09, 2026

(2) 56- W. P. 12563-2025.odt ORAL ORDER (PER ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J):- 1.

Heard.

2.

The tribe claims of the petitioners of belonging to "Koli Mahadev" Scheduled Tribe are pending before the respondent/Scrutiny Committee since 7.3.2022 & 19.10.2024 respectively. This Court, by an order dated 10th October 2025, has already protected the admissions of the petitioners. 3.

Despite service of notice none appeared for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

4.

In that view of the matter, we direct the respondent No.2/Tribe Committee to decide the tribe claims of the petitioners of belonging to "Koli Mahadev" Scheduled Tribe as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six weeks from today. 5.

Till the tribe claim of the petitioners are decided, respondent Nos.3 and 4 shall not disturb the admissions of the petitioners. 6.

With these directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (ABASAHEB D. SHINDE) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) JUDGE JUDGE YSK/