Bombay High Court
SANDIP GANYANSING SABLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. ITS SECRETARY TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT. AND ORS.
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court may direct the respondent to keep the reserved ST post vacant for four weeks but cannot issue directions to the Caste Scrutiny Committee.
Summary
The petitioner, Sandip Ganyansing Sable, filed a writ petition seeking a provisional appointment as Shikshan Sevak pending validation of his Scheduled Tribe (ST) status by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. He argued that although his application for validation was filed in 2024, the Committee had not decided, and a prior order from the Aurangabad Bench directing a decision within six months remained unimplemented. The respondents, including the Zilla Parishad, were asked whether a reserved post could be kept vacant for four weeks to allow the petitioner to obtain the required certificate. The Court held that while it cannot issue directions to the Caste Scrutiny Committee, it may direct the respondent to keep the reserved post vacant for a limited period. Accordingly, the respondent agreed to keep one ST‑reserved Shikshan Sevak post vacant for four weeks, an undertaking accepted by the Court. The petition was disposed, allowing the petitioner to continue pursuing his caste validation claim.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a provisional appointment pending validation of his caste status by the Caste Scrutiny Committee.
- Whether the High Court can direct the respondent to keep a reserved post vacant for a specified period.
- Whether the Court has jurisdiction to issue directions affecting the functioning of the Caste Scrutiny Committee.
Subjects
- provisional appointment
- caste validation
- Scheduled Tribe
- Caste Scrutiny Committee
- reserved post
- writ petition
- administrative law
Judgment
915-WP-4871-2026.doc
HARISH
Digitally signed
by HARISH
VITHAL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
VITHAL CHAUDHARI
CHAUDHARI Date:
2026.10.01
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
10:53:24 +0530
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 4871 OF 2026
Sandip Ganyansing Sable ...Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secretary ...Respondents
Tribal Development Dept. And Others
——————
Mr. Saurabh P. Tandale for the Petitioner.
Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Kedar Lad a/w Indrayani Patil for the Respondents.
——————
Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
Date : September 30, 2026.
P. C. :
1. By the present petition, the petitioner seeks provisional
appointment in terms of the Government Resolution of 12 th December,
2011, which permits such provisional appointment pending the
validation by the Caste Scrutiny Committee.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
though the application for validation was submitted in the year 2024,
the Caste Scrutiny Committee has not decided the application. He would
further submit that subsequently a petition was iled before this Court,
Harish 1 of 3
915-WP-4871-2026.doc
Aurangabad Bench, which had the jurisdiction in the matter, which
directed the committee to decide the pending tribe claim of the
petitioner within a period of six months. He submits that despite the
said directions, the Caste Scrutiny Committee has not decided the
application. He submits that the petitioner was duly selected to the post
of Shikshan Sevak in the respondent No. 2, Zilla Parishad school, and his
selection is likely to be cancelled as the caste validity certiicate has not
been submitted.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we inquired
with the learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2, Zilla Parishad,
whether it is possible to keep one post reserved for a period of four
weeks in order to enable the petitioner to obtain the validity certiicate
from the Caste Scrutiny Committee. As the Caste Scrutiny Committee is
of District Sambhajinagar, the same is outside the jurisdiction of this
Court, no directions can be issued by this Court and appropriate action is
required to be taken by the petitioner before the Aurangabad Bench.
4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2, on instructions,
submits that for a period of four weeks, one reserved post will be kept
vacant for the petitioner. The statement is accepted as undertaking
given to this Court.
5. In light of the above, the petition is disposed of by directing
respondent No. 2 to keep one reserved post of Shikshan Sevak vacant
Harish 2 of 3
915-WP-4871-2026.doc
from the ST category for a period of four weeks. The petitioner is at
liberty to pursue his caste validation claim before the Caste Scrutiny
Committee or take appropriate action as is permissible in law.
6. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
[Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]
Harish 3 of 3
Checking your session…