Bombay High Court
Shivani S/O Bhika Ingle vs S.T. Caste Certificate Scrutiny ... on 1 August, 2025
Author: Anil S. Kilor
Bench: Anil S. Kilor
circulated matter
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.224 OF 2025
Shivani s/o Bhika Ingle
Vs.
Schedule Tribe Caste Certificate, Yawatmal and others
______________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
AGPearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order
and Registrar's orders.
Mr. R.S. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the petitioner/s
Mr. S.M. Ukey, Addl.GP for the respondent Nos.1 and 2/State
Mr. N.A. Gaikwad, Advocate for the respondent No.3
-------------------------------
CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 01.08.2025
Civil Application (CAW) No.1748 of 2025
1. For the reasons stated in the application, the
application is allowed.
2. The amendment be carried out forthwith.
3. The learned AGP waives service of notice for the
respondent No.2/State.
4. Mr. Gaikwad, learned counsel, waives service of
notice for the respondent No.3.
5. In the meantime, the urgency in the present matter is
that on 03.05.2025, the petitioner has to produce Validity
Certificate, however, in the present petition the
invalidation of the validity is under challenge and
considering the fact that all the documents filed along with
the claim, support the claim of the petitioner as 'Thakur'
Scheduled Tribe, in view of the decision of the Full Bench
nd.thawre
circulated matter
of this Court in the case of Shilpa Vishnu Thakur Vs. State
of Maharashtra1.
6. The learned Additional G.P. argues that it is not
sufficient to issue validity only on the basis of entry of
'Thakur', where all the documents though shown the entry
of 'Thakur', in such case, an affinity test have to apply.
7. In the present case, the petitioner failed the affinity
test. However, it was pointed out that two validity
certificates have been issued within his family, which were
not considered by the Committee on the ground of certain
discrepancies, though no specific details of such
discrepancies have been recorded.
8. In this regard, the learned Additional G.P. seeks time
to explain the same.
9. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner is
insisting for interim order for the reason that on
03.08.2025 i.e. on Sunday he has to either produce the
validity or the order of the Court, to protect his admission
in Engineering Course.
10. Mr. Gaikwad, learned counsel for the newly added
respondent No.3, strongly opposes the petition in view of
the judgment in the case of Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur
Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs. State of Maharashtra and
others2.
11. We are conscious about the law laid down by the
1 2009 (3) Mh.L.J. 995
2 (2023) 16 SCC 415
nd.thawre
circulated matter
Hon'ble Supreme court of India in the case of Maharashtra
Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti (supra), however,
if the case of the present petitioner is not considered,
particularly, in the backdrop there are two validity
certificates in his family, the loss of an academic year is
irreversible.
12. In this situation, we request Mr. Gaikwad, learned
counsel for the respondent No.3, to take instructions as to
whether, in the event the petition is allowed after final
hearing on 05.08.2025, the respondent No.3 would admit
the petitioner at this stage. However, he expressed his
inability to take any positive steps in that regard.
13. In the peculiar facts and circumstances, we are left
with no other option than to pass the following order.
(i) Place this matter on 05.08.2025 for final hearing
on high on Board.
(ii) In the meantime, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 are
directed not to reject the application for admission of
the petitioner on the ground that the validity is not
submitted till 05.08.2025.
An athenticated copy of this order be given to the
learned cousnel for the petitioner.
(VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.)
Signed by: Mr. Niranjan Thawre
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
nd.thawre
Date: 01/08/2025 18:51:51
