Bombay High Court
Satvik Ramesh Pataniwar Thr ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 18 April, 2022
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka, S. G. Mehare
wp4339.22, etc.
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.4339 OF 2022
Satvik S/o Ramesh Pataniwar,
Age : 17 years, Occ. Education,
R/o Mandva (Ki), Tq. Kinwat,
Dist. Nanded,
Through Father and natural guardian
Ramesh S/o Narsimalu Pataniwar,
Age : 44 years, Occ. Service,
R/o As above ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai
2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Verification Committee, Kinwat,
Through its Dy. Director (R),
At Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS
Mr. S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for petitioner;
Mr. A.R. Kale, A.G.P. for respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4345 OF 2022
Sanket S/o Suresh Pataniwar
Age : 17 years, Occ. Education,
R/o Mandva, Tq. Kinwat,
Dist. Nanded
Through Father and natural guardian
Suresh S/op Narsimalu Pataniwar,
Age : 42 years, Occ. Agri.,
R/o As Above ..PETITIONER
::: Uploaded on - 19/04/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 20/04/2022 05:23:36 :::
wp4339.22, etc.
(2)
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai
2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Verification Committee, Kinwat,
Through its Dy. Director (R),
At Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS
Mr. S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for petitioner;
Mr. S.G. Karlekar, A.G.P. for respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4330 OF 2022
Sumit S/o Keshavrao Tippanbone,
Age : 17 years, Occ. Education,
R/o Nadihattarga, Tq. Nilanga,
Dist. Latur
Through Father and natural guardian
Keshav S/o Baburao Tippanbone
Age : 43 years, Occ. Service,
R/o As above ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai
2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Verification Committee, Kinwat,
Through its Dy. Director (R),
At Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 19/04/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 20/04/2022 05:23:36 :::
wp4339.22, etc.
(3)
Mr. S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for petitioner;
Mr. S.P. Tiwari, A.G.P. for respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4391 OF 2022
Sneha S/o Satish Aspat
Age : 17 years, Occ. Education,
R/o Vijay Nagar, Nanded,
Tq. and Dist. Nanded
Through Father and natural guardian
Sainath S/o Venkatrao Aspat,
Age : 48 years, Occ. Service,
R/o As above ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai
2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Verification Committee, Kinwat,
Through its Dy. Director (R),
At Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS
Mr. S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for petitioner;
Mr. A.R. Kale, A.G.P. for respondents
CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA
AND
S. G. MEHARE, JJ.
DATE : 18th April, 2022
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per R.D. Dhanuka, J.)
wp4339.22, etc.
1. Writ Petition Nos.4330 of 2022 and 4391 of 2022 are not on
board. On mentioning, these matters are taken on board.
2. Rule. Learned A.G.Ps. waive service for the respondents. Rule
made returnable forthwith.
3. By these petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the petitioners seek an order or direction against respondent
no.2 to finalize their tribe claim verification proceedings.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners invited our attention to the
order dated 25.1.2022 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in
Writ Petition No.1251 of 2022 in the case of Rakshan Shankarrao
Chettiwar vs. The State of Maharashtra & anr. and submitted that the
similar order may be passed by this Court.
5. Learned A.G.Ps. do not dispute that the facts before this Court
in these petitions and in Writ Petition No.1251 of 2022 are identical.
6. We accordingly pass the following order :-
wp4339.22, etc.
In case the proposals seeking validation of the tribe claim of the
petitioners are pending with respondent No.2, then respondent No.2
shall endeavour to decide the validation proceedings by 30.06.2022.
The petitioners shall appear before the Committee on 22.04.2022. the
petitioners shall co-operate in expeditious disposal of the proceedings.
7. Writ Petitions stand disposed of.
8. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs.
(S. G. MEHARE, J.) (R.D. DHANUKA, J.)
amj
