Bombay High Court
RENUKA SAMADHAN BATLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court declined to direct the respondents to grant provisional admission to the petitioner.
Summary
Renuka Samadhan Batle filed a writ petition seeking a court direction for provisional admission to a benefit while a committee was to decide on the validity of her claim. The petitioner relied on a Division Bench decision in Aditi Ramsing Jadhao v. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, arguing that similar relief should be granted. The respondents cited a Supreme Court decision in Dilip Vitthal Bambale & Others v. Vinitkumar Motiram Totlod & Others, contending that such provisional relief is not warranted. The High Court examined the precedents and concluded that it could not accede to the petitioner's request for provisional admission. Consequently, the petition was disposed of without granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can direct the authorities to grant provisional admission to the petitioner pending the committee's decision.
- Whether the precedent set in Aditi Ramsing Jadhao v. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee is applicable to the present case.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dilip Vitthal Bambale & Others v. Vinitkumar Motiram Totlod & Others precludes provisional relief.
Subjects
- provisional admission
- writ petition
- administrative law
- caste certificate
- pending decision
- jurisdiction
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41070-DB
919-WP.11780.2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
919 WRIT PETITION NO. 11780 OF 2026
Renuka Samadhan Batle
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra Thr Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Sahil Choudhari h/f. Mr. D. D. Choudhari, Advocate for the
Petitioner.
Mr. S. R. Yadav-Lonikar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Mr. Sachin V. Kuptekar, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
...
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 4th SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. At the outset, learned AGP submits that, by today evening, the
Committee would pass its judgment and issue the order to the
petitioner.
2. The learned advocate for the petitioner, however, insists that
this Court should issue directions to the respondents to grant
admission to the petitioner atleast provisionally, in case the claim is
invalidated. He relies upon by the order passed by the Division Bench
at Nagpur in the case of Aditi Ramsing Jadhao vs. The Vice-
Chairman/Member Secretary, Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Yavatmal & Anrother1.
1 Writ Petition No.6545 of 2026 dated 24.08.2026
Sayyed 1/2
919-WP.11780.2026.doc
3. Learned advocate for respondent no.3, however, points out the
order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dilip Vitthal
Bambale & Others vs. Vinitkumar Motiram Totlod & Others2.
4. Considering above, this Court finds it difficult to accede to the
prayer of the petitioner to direct the authorities to grant provisional
admission to the petitioner.
5. Petition stands disposed off.
(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (KISHORE C. SANT, J.)
2 Civil Appeal Nos.11234-48 OF 2017
Sayyed 2/2
Checking your session…