Bombay High Court
DEEPALI UTTAMRAO LANDGEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The amendment granting the Committee power to review its own orders from 23 July 2026 bars the petitioners' challenge, leading to dismissal of the writ petitions.
Summary
The petitioners filed multiple writ petitions challenging show‑cause notices issued by the Committee (respondent No. 2) that demanded explanations for why their cases should not be reopened. The Committee relied on an amendment to the governing statute, effective 23 July 2026, which vested it with the power to review and reopen its own orders. The State, through its Attorney‑General, argued that the amendment gave the Committee absolute authority to revisit its decisions, rendering the petitioners' challenges untenable. The Court examined whether the amendment validly conferred such retrospective review power and whether the petitioners could seek relief against the show‑cause notices. Finding that the statutory amendment clearly authorized the Committee to reopen cases and that no other ground was raised, the Court concluded there was no basis to entertain the writ petitions. Consequently, all the writ petitions were dismissed and the matter was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the amendment to the statute, effective 23 July 2026, empowers the Committee to review and reopen its own orders.
- Whether the petitioners can challenge the show‑cause notices issued by the Committee under the amended statutory framework.
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain the writ petitions in light of the Committee's newly conferred powers.
Subjects
- review of administrative order
- show cause notice
- tribal development
- writ petition
- statutory amendment
- jurisdiction
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:40165-DB
1 4-wp 11222-2026+.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 11222 OF 2026
Sudhir Pandurang Kadam And Another .. Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra Department
Of Tribal Development And Another .. Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11302 OF 2026
Narayan Uttamrao Landge .. Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Another .. Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11303 OF 2026
Avinash Ashokrao Landge .. Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Another .. Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11304 OF 2026
Ashok Vishwanath Landge .. Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Another .. Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11305 OF 2026
Uttam Vishwanath Landge .. Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Another .. Respondents
2 4-wp 11222-2026+.odt
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11306 OF 2026
Sonali Uttamrao Landge .. Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Another .. Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11307 OF 2026
Deepali Uttamrao Landge .. Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Another .. Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11308 OF 2026
Rahul Ramrao Landge .. Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Another .. Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11309 OF 2026
Madan Laxmanrao Landge .. Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Another .. Respondents
Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar, Advocate for Petitioners.
Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, Mr. S. R. Yadav-Lonikar, Mr. K. N. Lokhande,
Smt. S. S. Joshi, Mr. P. S. Patil, Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, Mr. R. S.
Wani, AGP’s for Respondents-State in respective matters.
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 01st SEPTEMBER, 2026.
3 4-wp 11222-2026+.odt
PER COURT :-
1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioners.
2. The petitioners are challenging show cause notices issued by
the committee – respondent No. 2 asking the petitioners as to why
the cases of petitioners shall not be reopened. The notices are
dated 30.07.2026 and 06.08.2026.
3. The learned A.G.P., at the outset, raises the objection that,
now the committee is vested with the power to review its own
order. The said amendment is brought on the statute book on
22.07.2026 and therefore, from 23.07.2026 onwards the
committee has every power to reopen/review the cases.
4. In view of the above, this Court finds that, there is no reason
to entertain the petitions. Therefore, the writ petitions stand
disposed of.
( JITENDRA JAIN, J.) ( KISHORE C. SANT, J. )
P.S.B.
Checking your session…