Haribhau S/O Gyandeo Khandare vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Its ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 11255 Bom

                              9-MCA-649-22.odt                                                      1



                                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                                                        NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
                                    CIVIL APPLICATION (O) NO.831 OF 2022 IN M.C.A.(Review) No.649/2022
                                                in WRIT PETITION NO. 2618 of 2022 (DECIDED)
                                  Haribhau G. Khandare vs. State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Deptt. of Social
                                                                  Welfare and others.
                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Office Notes, Office Memoranda of                                                 Court's or Judge's Order
                              Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
                               or directions and Registrar's order
                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Shri T.S.Deshpande, Advocate for applicant.
                                            Ms S.S.Jachak, Assistant Government Pleader for non-applicant nos.1 to 3.

                                            CORAM :-              A.S.CHANDURKAR AND URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, JJ.

DATE :- OCTOBER 21, 2022

Since the impugned order passed by the Scrutiny Committee indicates that the present applicant was heard while invalidating the caste claim of the non-applicant no.4 herein, the prayer made in this application is granted.

The civil application is disposed of. Misc. Civil Application (Review) No.649 of 2022 Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the grounds raised in the review application.

It is submitted that the document of 1927 that was referred to while setting aside the order of the Scrutiny Committee was of a person not related to the non-applicant no.4. Hence the said document could not have been taken into consideration.

For the reasons stated in the paragraph 5 of the judgment under review, it can be seen that on being satisfied that the Scrutiny Committee did not grant due weightage to that document, the said document was taken into consideration. We do not find that there is any error apparent on the face of record to invoke review jurisdiction. The Miscellaneous Civil Application is therefore rejected.

Digitally Signed byJAYANT S ANDURKAR (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) (A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.) Personal Assistant Signing Date:

21.10.2022 17:03 Andurkar..