PINNI CO OP HSG SOC. LTD THRU CHAIRMANversusTHE CHAIRMAN NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULE TRIBES AND ORS

                                                                   906-WP10010-2026.DOC

                                                                                Santosh

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                     WRIT PETITION NO. 10010 OF 2026

                      Pinni Co-op. Housing Society Ltd.                   ...Petitioner
                                        Versus
                      The Chairman National Commission for
                      Schedule Tribes & ors.                            …Respondents



                      Mr. R. D. Soni, i/b Ram & Co., for the Petitioner.
                      Mr. Atharva Dandekar, a/w Prabhakar Narwane and Harshal
                           Belekar, for Respondent No.5.
                      Mr. N. C. Walimbe, Addl. GP, a/w Dr. Dhruti Kapadia, AGP for
                           the State.
                      Mr. Sanjeev Gorwadkar, a/w Shrirang Katneshwarkar, Suresh
                           Palande, Dhairyasheel Palande and Saurabh Palande, for
SANTOSH
SUBHASH                    Respondent Nos.7,11,16 and 17.
KULKARNI
Digitally signed by
SANTOSH SUBHASH
KULKARNI
Date: 2026.08.08
11:17:40 +0530                                       CORAM:      N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                                                     DATED:      6th AUGUST, 2026

                      Oral Order:-

                      1.   Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.


                      2.   The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 15 th

                      June, 2026 passed by the National Commission for Scheduled

                      Tribes inter alia directing the Collector, Sub-Divisional Of>cer,

                      Pune and the concerned Tahsildar to prohibit the transfer of the

                      subject land under Section 36A of the Maharashtra Land




                                                    1/4
                                             906-WP10010-2026.DOC

Revenue Code and also make an entry in the record of rights of

the subject land.


3.   Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the Additional Collector,

Pune, has passed an interim order dated 23 rd June, 2026 in the

review application >led by the Respondent Nos.6 to 21, thereby

directing status quo as to the development of the subject land

and transfer thereof.    The subsequent order dated 28 th July,

2026 is also challenged in this petition.


4.   The principal ground of challenge is that, the National

Commission for Scheduled Tribes has no adjudicatory power

and, thus, the order dated 15th June, 2026 directing the revenue

authorities to effect the mutation in the record of rights of the

subject land and take consequential action were wholly without

jurisdiction. Both the impugned orders are also assailed on the

ground of non-observance of the principles of natural justice

and fundamental principles of judicial process.


5.   Attention of the Court is invited to the judgment of the

Supreme Court in the case of Mumbai Port Authority vs.

National Commission for Scheduled Caste and Others 1, wherein

the Supreme Court has clari>ed that the powers entrusted to

National Commission for Scheduled Caste (NCSC) are limited in

1    2026 SCC OnLine SC 1398.
                                2/4
                                              906-WP10010-2026.DOC

nature. Clearly NCSC and its other compatriots under Articles

338A and 338B are Constitutional Bodies with a socially

bene>cent purpose but quite apparently, the Legislature has

prescribed a role that is recommendatory and advisory, but

certainly not adjudicatory. They are not meant to be bodies

taking over adjudicatory functions.


6.   It appears that the Additional Collector has passed the

impugned order predominantly inEuenced by the order passed

by the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes dated 15 th

June, 2026. Indeed there is reference to the other aspects of

the matter as well. However, since, the order dated 28 th July,

2026 is passed primarily on the basis of the order of National

Commission for Scheduled Tribes, which, in turn, has the

trappings of an adjudicatory order, the impugned order dated

28th July, 2026 cannot be sustained.


7.   It would be appropriate to remit the matter back to the

Additional Collector to pass a fresh order in the pending review

application after providing an effective opportunity of hearing to

the Petitioners and Respondent Nos.5 to 21.




8.   Hence the following order:


                               3/4
                                                   906-WP10010-2026.DOC

                            :ORDER:


(i)     The impugned order dated 28th July, 2026 passed by the

        Additional   Collector     in    Review   Application    stands

        quashed and set aside.


(ii)    The matter stands remitted back to the Additional

        Collector to pass a fresh order in Review Application, after

        providing an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners and

        Respondent Nos.5 to 21


(iii)   The parties shall appear before the Additional Collector

        on 10th August, 2026.


(iv)    The   Additional   Collector     is   requested   to   pass   an

        appropriate order in accordance with law within a period

        of two weeks thereafter.


(v)     All contentions of all the parties are kept open for

        consideration by the Additional Collector.


(vi)    The petition stands disposed.


                                              [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




                                   4/4