Gadamwad Baliram Shripati v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

2026:BHC-AUG:2940-DB 1 944.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 944 WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2026 GADAMWAD BALIRAM SHRIPATI

VERSUS

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

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. A.D.Sonkawade h/f.Mr. Jayewar Sainath Gangadhar AGP/APP for Respondent/State : Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya ...

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

DATE : 22.01.2026 PER COURT :

.

Heard.

2.

By this Writ Petition, the petitioner is taking an exception to the order dated 28.10.2025 passed by the respondent No.2/Scrutiny Committee by which the proposal seeking verification of his tribe claim of belonging to 'Mannervarlu' Scheduled Tribe has been dismissed for non-prosecution.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to some unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner could not keep track of the proceedings nor the petitioner at any point of time received the showcause notices issued by the respondent/Scrutiny Committee. The Scrutiny Committee has observed that despite several show-cause notices issued to the petitioner, he remained absent and thus, the petitioner is not interested to pursue the tribe claim. He submits that

2 944.doc the impugned order is erroneous and therefore, the same is liable to be quashed and set-aside.

4.

Per contra, the learned AGP submits that the order itself depicts that the respondent/Scrutiny Committee has issued several show-cause notices to the petitioner. However, the petitioner was not diligent in pursuing his tribe claim. He therefore, urged that the respondent/Scrutiny Committee has rightly passed the impugned order thereby dismissing the tribe claim of the petitioner for non-prosecution. 5.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGP, we find that the impugned order depicts that several show-cause notices were issued to the petitioner and still the petitioner did not bother to pursue his tribe claim. Be that as it may, since the matter pertains to social status of the petitioner, we find it expedient in the interest of justice to permit the petitioner to pursue his tribe claim on merits.

6.

In that view of the matter, we are inclined to allow this Writ Petition. Hence, we pass following order :

ORDER

i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

ii) The impugned order dated 28.10.2025 passed by the respondent/Scrutiny Committee thereby rejecting the tribe claim of the petitioner for non-prosecution is hereby quashed and set-aside.

3 944.doc iii) The tribe claim of the petitioner shall stand restored to its original position.

iv) We direct the petitioner to appear before the respondent/Scrutiny Committee on 02.02.2026 and shall extend full-cooperation in expeditious decision of his tribe claim.

( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. ) ( SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. ) vsj..