Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

RUDRAKSH HEMANT KOREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SEC. TRIBAL DEV. DEPT. AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The Court held that the Scrutiny Committee must decide the petitioner’s validity certificate application within two weeks, the Vigilance Cell report is dispensed with, and the State CET Cell shall not cancel the admission pending that decision.

Summary

The petitioner, a Scheduled Tribe candidate, sought a direction for the Scrutiny Committee to promptly decide his application for a caste validity certificate required for admission to Vidya Pratishthan's College of Agriculture Biotechnology, Pune. He had been provisionally admitted based on earlier certificates granted to his relatives but could not submit the certificate before the 4 September deadline. The Scrutiny Committee had referred the matter to the Vigilance Cell, but the petitioner argued that the vigilance report could be dispensed with. The Court ordered the Scrutiny Committee to decide the application within two weeks, directing that the Vigilance Cell report be omitted, and directed the State CET Cell not to cancel the petitioner’s admission pending the decision. The order was modeled on a prior decision in Varad Jayawant Patil (Minor) through Father Jayawant Patil v. State of Maharashtra. The writ petition was thereafter disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the Scrutiny Committee can be compelled to decide the caste validity certificate application within a specified period.
  • Whether the Vigilance Cell inquiry report can be dispensed with in the proceedings before the Scrutiny Committee.
  • Whether the State CET Cell can be restrained from cancelling the petitioner’s provisional admission pending the certificate.

Subjects

  • caste validity certificate
  • Scheduled Tribe
  • admission
  • interim relief
  • Scrutiny Committee
  • State CET Cell
  • vigilance inquiry
  • writ petition
  • Maharashtra

Judgment

                                                                               903-wp-10956-2026.doc
                      jsn


                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                             CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                              WRIT PETITION NO.10956 OF 2026

                            Kum. Rudraksh Hemant Kore                         ...Petitioner
JITENDRA
SHANKAR
NIJASURE
Digitally signed by
                                  Versus
JITENDRA SHANKAR
NIJASURE
Date: 2026.09.02
14:52:21 +0530

                            State of Maharashtra & Ors.                       ...Respondents
                                                             ----------
                            Mr. R.K. Mendadkar, Mr. Siddhant Sawai and Mr. Jagdish Kawale for
                            the Petitioner.
                            Mrs. Kavita Solunke, Addl. G.P. with Mr. S.H. Kankal, AGP for the
                            State.
                            Mr. Nikhil Chavan, for Respondent No.3.
                                                             ----------

                                                      CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA AND
                                                              FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ.
                                                      DATE  : 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2026.
                            O R D E R:

                            1.            Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent

                            of parties.


                            2.            By this Petition, the Petitioner is seeking a direction to

                            Respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny Committee to forthwith decide the

                            application of the Petitioner, which had been made on 5th February

                            2026, for grant of validity certificate in accordance with law.


                            3.            The urgency for moving the present Petition is that the

                            Petitioner has been granted provisional admission in Vidya

                                                               1/4
                                                  903-wp-10956-2026.doc

Pratishthan's College of Agriculture Biotechnology, Pune and is

required to submit the caste validity certificate through Respondent

No. 3 (State CET Cell) by 4th September 2026.


4.          The Petitioner has placed reliance upon the validity

certificates granted to the Petitioner's paternal blood relatives, which

includes the Petitioner's cousin sister, Mayuri Umakant Kore, on 21st

April 2014, and Petitioner's cousin uncles, viz. Umakant Dagdu Kore

and Namakant Dagdu Kore, on 28th January 2010, following due

process of law.


5.          The Respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny Committee has referred

the case of the Petitioner to the Vigilance Cell for carrying out

requisite inquiry, and the report is awaited.


6.          Mr. Mendadkar, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner on

instructions, states that the Vigilance Cell report may be dispensed

with in the proceedings before the Respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny

Committee. The statement is accepted.


7.          The Petitioner is stated to have appeared for MHT-CET

Provisional list of admission to the Undergraduate Course in

Agriculture 2026–2027, the results of which had been declared on

                                  2/4
                                                              903-wp-10956-2026.doc

15th June 2026. Thereafter, he has participated in CAP for admission

to the said Undergraduate Agriculture and Allied Courses 2026 under

the Scheduled Tribe category. He has, during the CAP round process,

being       allotted     Vidya      Pratishthan's      College        of   Agriculture

Biotechnology, Pune through Respondent No. 3 State CET Cell.


8.               Considering that the Petitioner is unable to submit the

caste validity certificate prior to 4th September 2026, we are of the

view that till Respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny Committee decides the

application of the Petitioner for grant of validity certificate and for a

period of one week thereafter, Respondent No. 3 - State CET Cell is

required to be directed not to cancel the admission of the Petitioner

in the aforesaid institute.


9.               Accordingly, we pass a similar order as passed by this

Bench in Varad Jayawant Patil (Minor) through Father Jayawant Patil

vs. State of Maharashtra & Others1.


10.              Hence, the following Order:-


         (i) Respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny Committee is directed to decide

      the case of the Petitioner for grant of validity certificate within a

1     Writ Petition No. 10697 of 2026, order dated 27th August 2026

                                           3/4
                                                     903-wp-10956-2026.doc

      period of two weeks from the date of this order.


         (ii) The Vigilance Cell inquiry report has been dispensed with

      by the Petitioner and, accordingly, Respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny

      Committee shall not wait for the Vigilance Cell inquiry report and

      shall decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of validity

      certificate within the aforesaid timeline.


         (iii) Respondent No. 3 - State CET Cell shall not cancel the

      admission of the Petitioner granted in the aforesaid Institute till

      the decision of Respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny Committee, and in the

      event the decision is adverse, two weeks from the decision due to

      non-submission of certificate of validity before the cut-off date.


11.            The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of in the above

terms. There shall be no order as to costs.


12.            The parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.




         [ FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J. ]                [ R.I. CHAGLA J. ]




                                     4/4


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.