← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/2276/2026disposed off

Sadhana D/O Shankarrao Gogrod v. State Of Maharashtra Through And ORS

2026-02-27Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. Shinde2 pages

(1) 950- W. P. 2276-2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2276 OF 2026 1.

Sadhana D/o Shankarrao Gogrod, Age : 27 Years, Occ. Student, R/o. Brahman Galli Biloli, Tq. Builoli, Dist. Nanded.

..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai- 32.

2.

The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Kinwat, Headquarter Aurangabad Through its Member Secretary.

3.

The Dean, Government Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur.

..RESPONDENTS ....

Advocate for the petitioner : Mr. A. P. Yenegure A.P.P. for Respondent/State : Mrs. S. P. Sonpawale ....

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

DATED : FEBRUARY 27, 2026 ORAL ORDER (PER ABASAHEB D.SHINDE, J.) 1.

Heard.

2.

This petition has been filed for a limited purpose of seeking direction to respondent No.2/ Scrutiny Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner of belonging to "Mannervarlu" Scheduled Tribe, which is pending since 18.12.2025.

(2) 950- W. P. 2276-2026.odt 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, for non-submission of validity certificate, the employer of the petitioner pursuant to clause "13" of the appointment order, is likely to take adverse action.

4.

In that view of the matter, we direct respondent No.2/Scrutiny Committee to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six months from today.

5.

Till the tribe claim of the petitioner is decided, the employer/s of the petitioner shall not take any adverse action against the petitioner solely on the ground of non- submission of validity certificate.

6.

Needless to state that the protection granted by this Court will operate, only till the tribe claim of the petitioner is decided.

7.

Petitioner shall not claim any equity.

8.

With these directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) JUDGE JUDGE YSK/