Bombay High Court
GAJANAN SOUDAGAR PATANGEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The petitions are dismissed as the amendment to Section 10(5) provides the requisite protection and no interim relief is warranted.
Summary
A group of petitioners filed writ petitions challenging the cancellation of their caste certificates and seeking a stay of the order pending appeal to the Divisional Commissioner appointed as Appellate Authority under Section 6B of the Maharashtra Act No. XXXVIII of 2026. They argued that the order failed to mention the protection under the newly introduced Section 10(5), which safeguards benefits for 90 days during the appeal period and an additional 30 days thereafter. The State contended that the amendment already provides sufficient protection and no specific interim order is required. The Court examined the amendment effective from 22‑07‑2026, which clarifies the timelines for withdrawal of benefits after an appeal is decided or after the appeal period lapses. Concluding that the statutory scheme now adequately protects the petitioners, the Court dismissed the petitions without granting a stay, directing the Divisional Commissioner to decide appeals promptly.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to an interim stay of the order cancelling their caste certificates pending appeal to the Divisional Commissioner.
- Whether the omission of a specific reference to Section 10(5) in the Committee's order deprives the petitioners of statutory protection.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Act No. XXXVIII of 2026 — s. 10(1), 10(5), 11(1), 11(2), 6B
Subjects
- caste certificate
- false certificate
- fake certificate
- appellate authority
- Section 6B
- Section 10(5)
- interim relief
- writ petition
- Maharashtra
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41759-DB
Sr. Nos.905 to 909 & 911, 912 & 914.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
905 WRIT PETITION NO. 11994 OF 2026
Pravin Soudagar Patange
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. B. A. Shinde, AGP for Respondent-State.
…
AND
906 WRIT PETITION NO. 11995 OF 2026
Kiran Maroti Somwad
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. N. S. Tekale, AGP for Respondent-State.
…
AND
907 WRIT PETITION NO. 11996 OF 2026
Gajanan Soudagar Patange
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. B. A. Shinde, AGP for Respondent-State.
…
AND
908 WRIT PETITION NO. 11997 OF 2026
Ashok Dnyanoba Boinwad
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondent-State.
…
Sayyed 1/5
Sr. Nos.905 to 909 & 911, 912 & 914.doc
AND
909 WRIT PETITION NO. 11998 OF 2026
Gajanand Dnyanoba Boinwad
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. R. S. Wani, AGP for Respondent-State.
...
AND
911 WRIT PETITION NO. 12000 OF 2026
Vinod Shesherao Pallewad
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. K. N. Lokhande, AGP for Respondent-State.
…
AND
912 WRIT PETITION NO. 12001 OF 2026
Sahebrao Shesherao Pallewad
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. B. A. Shinde, AGP for Respondent-State.
...
AND
914 WRIT PETITION NO. 12009 OF 2026
Suvarna Soudagar Patange
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondent-State.
...
Sayyed 2/5
Sr. Nos.905 to 909 & 911, 912 & 914.doc
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 8th SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned AGP for
the State.
2. The petitioners have prayed for direction to the Divisional
Commissioner, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar-respondent no.3, an
Appellate Authority under Section 6B of the Maharashtra Act No.
XXXVIII of 2026. A further prayer is to stay the impugned order. It is
contended that though the Divisional Commissioner is now appointed
as Appellate Authority, the regular working has not started.
3. The second apprehension on the basis of which interim relief is
prayed is that, the Committee in the footnote after the judgment has
not given any intimation regarding the remedy of appeal before the
Appellate Authority but on the contrary, the note shows that
respondent no.4-employer is directed to take action against the
petitioners under Section 10(1) and Section 11(1) and (2). He thus
submits that on one hand though there is a remedy available, it is not
shown in the order and on the other hand, Section 10(5) is not
pointed out. Sub-section (5) of Section 10 infact, protects the service
benefits of the petitioners for a period of 90 days i.e. during the
Sayyed 3/5
Sr. Nos.905 to 909 & 911, 912 & 914.doc
period of appeal and for a further period of 30 days after the appeal
is decided. In case no appeal is preferred till 30 days protection is
given after lapsing of the limitation period of 90 days. The
petitioners’ apprehension is thus that since this is not specifically
mentioned in the order passed by the Committee, the employer is
likely to take action against the petitioners.
4. Learned AGP submits that now law protects the petitioners like
persons and the situation is taken care of and no such specific order
is necessary.
5. By way of amendment which came into effect on 22.07.2026,
the legislature has provided a remedy of appeal. Sub-section (5) to
Section 10 is introduced which reads as under :-
“(5) After Caste Certificate has been cancelled and confiscated by
the Scrutiny Committee, the concerned Appointing Authority, Local
Authority, Government, Educational Institution, Statutory Body or
Agency shall take action for withdrawal of benefits given to such
person, –
(a) within thirty days from the date of order of the Appellate
Authority if appeal is filed, and it is rejected by the Appellate
Authority ;
(b) within thirty days from the lapse of appeal period
specified in sub-section (1) of section 6B, if appeal is not filed”;
(5) in the marginal note, after the words “false Caste Certificate”,
the words “fake Caste Certificate” shall be inserted.
6. It is thus clear that the action contemplated under the
aforesaid provisions can be taken only after expiry of the period
Sayyed 4/5
Sr. Nos.905 to 909 & 911, 912 & 914.doc
prescribed under Section 10(5), viz., 30 days from the date of
disposal of the appeal, or, where no appeal is preferred, after expiry
of the limitation period of 90 days and the further period of 30 days.
7. With above clarification, petitions stand disposed off.
8. The learned Divisional Commissioner is expected to decide the
appeals as early as possible looking to the object behind the
amendment.
(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (KISHORE C. SANT, J.)
Sayyed 5/5
Checking your session…