Bombay High Court
KOMAL TULSHIRAM GIRDWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
No specific direction is necessary as sub‑section (5) of Section 10 of the Act suffices; the petition is disposed.
Summary
Komal Tulshiram Girdwad filed a writ petition challenging an order that directed his employer to take action under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De‑Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of issuance and verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000. The petitioner feared that the order required a specific direction, but the respondent’s AGP indicated that an appeal could be filed with the Divisional Commissioner. The Court noted that sub‑section (5) of Section 10 already provides for the required procedure, making a further specific direction unnecessary. Consequently, the Court found the petition could be disposed of without further order. The petition was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether a specific direction is required from the Court for the employer to act under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Caste Certificate Act, 2000, given the provisions of sub‑section (5).
- Whether the petitioner should approach the Divisional Commissioner for appeal instead of seeking further relief from the Court.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Caste Certificate Act
- Section 10
- sub‑section (5)
- Writ petition
- Divisional Commissioner
- Maharashtra
- Scheduled Castes
- Scheduled Tribes
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41052-DB
911-WP.11296.2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
911 WRIT PETITION NO. 11296 OF 2026
Komal Tulshiram Girdwad
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Ghanshyam K. Chinchole, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
...
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 4th SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner, learned AGP for
respondent nos.1 and 2 and Mr. Pulkundwar, learned advocate for
respondent no.3.
2. At the outset, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that,
since the remedy of appeal is now available to the petitioner,
petitioner intends to approach the Divisional Commissioner by filing
an appeal.
3. The learned AGP, on instructions, submits that now the
Divisional Commissioner is registering the appeal under the said Act.
If the petitioner approaches the office of Divisional Commissioner,
this appeal would be registered and will be dealt with in due course.
Sayyed 1/2
911-WP.11296.2026.doc
4. Considering above, this Court finds that the petition can be
conveniently disposed off in view of the statement made by the
learned AGP.
5. The apprehension of the petitioner is that in the impugned
order, the Committee has directed the employer of the petitioner to
take action under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes,
Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation
of issuance and verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 (“the said
Act”). The said apprehension is already taken care of by sub-section
(5) of Section 10 of the said Act. In that view, no specific direction is
necessary.
6. Considering above, petition stands disposed off.
(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (KISHORE C. SANT, J.)
Sayyed 2/2
Checking your session…