Rahul Lekhram Falake v. State Of Maha., Thr. Prin. Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayat Raj Dept., Mumbai And ORS.

2026:BHC-NAG:293-DB 104.wp.8512.2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2025 Rahul Lekhram Falake .Vs.

State of Maharashtra and others.

_______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Petitioner-in-person Mr P. P. Pendke, A.G.P for respondent Nos. 1 to 7/State CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ.

DATED : JANUARY , 2026 .

Heard Mr Rahul Lekharam Falke, the petitionerin-person. 2.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking various reliefs including the disqualification of respondent No. 8 from the post of Sarpanch of Village Panchayat, Nagalwadi, so also initiation of criminal prosecution against her under Section 125(A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

3.

The main grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No. 8 had contested the election in the month of December 2022 for the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Nagalwadi, which was reserved for woman of Schedule Caste category, on the basis of the certificate of validity dated 30.01.2013, thereby validating caste claim of the respondent No. 8 towards Mahar, SC. The aforesaid validity is on record at page 63 at Annexure VIII.

104.wp.8512.2025.odt 4.

According to the petitioner, the aforesaid validity is forged and hence, the respondent No. 8 needs tobe disqualified and the aforesaid action should be initiated against her.

5.

The petitioner had approached respondent No. 3 District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur thereby requesting to cancel her validity. However, respondent No. 3 Committee had informed the petitioner vide order dated 16.09.2025 that the jurisdiction of setting aside the validity lies with the Hon'ble High Court and hence, he has approached this Court by virtue of the present writ petition. However, perusal of the prayer shows that the petitioner has not prayed for quashing and setting aside the certificate of validity dated 30.01.2013 6.

Accordingly, we dispose of the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate proceeding challenging the certificate of validity dated 30.01.2013 issued in favour of the respondent No. 8 in proper format of application. No order as costs.

[RAJ D. WAKODE, J] [ANIL S. KILOR, J.] Namrata Signed by: Miss Namrata Suryawanshi Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 09/01/2026 18:05:24