Bombay High Court

VISHAL GAHININATH BUGEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT AND ORS

Decided: 8 May 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: R I CHAGLA ADVAIT M SETHNA

Holding

The petitioner may continue in service subject to producing the caste validity certificate, and the writ petition is disposed.

Summary

The petitioner was appointed as a Group‑C Firefighter by the Panvel Municipal Corporation, conditional on producing a caste validity certificate within six months. The petitioner failed to submit the certificate, leading the corporation to issue a show‑cause notice for termination of service. The court referred to the precedent Shrikant Chandrakant Saindane v. State of Maharashtra, which allows appointment pending production of the certificate, noting that the matter is under review by the Supreme Court. The court directed that the petitioner may continue duties provided he obtains the validity certificate and that the relevant committee decide his claim by 31 August 2026. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed.

Issues considered

Whether a candidate appointed conditionally can continue in service without having produced the caste validity certificate.
Whether the employer may terminate the appointment for failure to produce the certificate.
Applicability of the precedent set in Shrikant Chandrakant Saindane v. State of Maharashtra.

Subjects

appointment
caste validity certificate
show cause notice
service continuation
administrative law
writ petition

Judgment

                                                                              902-WP 5388.2026.doc

                   Kavita S.J.


                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                       WRIT PETITION NO.5388 OF 2026

                   Vishal s/o Gahininath Buge                     ...Petitioner

                           Versus

                   The State of Maharashtra & Ors.,               ...Respondents
                                                 ----------
                   Mr. Chintamani K. Bhangoji a/w Vishwajit S. Sharma for Petitioner.
                   N.C. Walimbe, Addl. GP a/w Tanu N. Bhatia, AGP for Respondent
                   Nos. 1 & 2 – State.
                   S.V. Gavane for Respondent No.3 – Panvel Municipal Corproation.
                                                    ----------

                                                    CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA AND
                                                            ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.

                                                    DATED        : 8th MAY, 2026.
                   ORDER :


                   1.              The Petitioner has been selected and appointed on the

                   post of Firefighter (Group-C) by the Respondent No.3, subject to

                   production of the Validity Certificate within six month, in the light of

                   the Government Resolution dated 12 th December, 2011.                     The

                   Appointment Letter is dated 27 th July, 2025.              The application
KAVITA
SUSHIL
JADHAV             submitted by the Petitioner to Respondent No.2, for scrutiny of his
Digitally signed
by KAVITA
SUSHIL JADHAV
Date: 2026.05.08
13:20:38 +0530
                   Caste Certificate, is pending since 31st January, 2025.

                                                      1/3
                                                         902-WP 5388.2026.doc


2.              We are of the view that this case would be covered by

Shrikant Chandrakant Saindane Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 1,

wherein this Court has concluded that the candidate can be

appointed on the condition that he will produce his Validity

Certificate. The said Judgment has been assailed before the Supreme

Court and the issue is pending adjudication.


3.              On account of failure of the Petitioner to produce Caste

Validity Certificate, the Respondent No.3 has issued Show Cause

Notice to the Petitioner as to why his service should not be

terminated.


4.              The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that the

Petitioner’s case has been presently referred to the Vigilance Cell and

the Petitioner would wholeheartedly co-operate in the proceedings.


5.              We expect the Committee to decide the claim of the

Petitioner on or before 31st August, 2026.


6.              With the above directions, the Petitioner can continue his

duties which will be subject to the condition of acquiring the Validity

Certificate.

1    2012(1) Mh. L.J. 787

                                     2/3
                                                     902-WP 5388.2026.doc


7.             With the above observations, the Writ Petition stands

disposed of.




         [ ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J. ]                [ R.I. CHAGLA, J. ]




                                  3/3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…