Bombay High Court
ASHOK TUKARAM FULEWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court allowed the writ petition and directed the petitioner to appear before the Scrutiny Committee for a fresh hearing on his Scheduled Tribe claim.
Summary
The petitioner, Ashok Tukaram Phulewad, challenged the invalidation of his claim to belong to the Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe by the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee of Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. The Committee had dismissed his claim on the ground of his repeated non‑appearance despite several notices, which the petitioner contended he did not receive except one. He argued that the lack of notice prevented him from producing the tribe validity certificate already issued to his brother's daughter, and he offered to appear before the Committee if the matter were remanded. The State, represented by the AGP, opposed the petition, asserting that the petitioner was duly notified on four occasions and his absence justified the rejection of his claim. The Court, after examining the record, noted the petitioner’s absence but directed that he be given a fresh hearing before the Scrutiny Committee on a specified date, allowing the petition with costs. Accordingly, the petitioner was ordered to appear before the Committee and to deposit costs of Rs.10,000 with the High Court Legal Services Sub‑Committee.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner’s claim to Scheduled Tribe status can be reconsidered despite his prior non‑appearance before the Verification Committee.
- Whether the Court can direct a fresh hearing before the Scrutiny Committee and allow the writ petition.
Subjects
- Scheduled Tribe
- Caste Certificate
- Verification Committee
- writ petition
- pension
- notice
- remand
- costs
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:26145-DB
6839.26wp
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
944 WRIT PETITION NO. 6839 OF 2026
ASHOK TUKARAM FULEWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY
AND OTHERS
…..
Mr G. K. Chinchole, Advocate h/f Mr A. C. Kanle, Advocate for
Petitioner
Ms J. P. Reddy, AGP for Respondents/State
…..
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT
AND
AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.
DATE : 02nd JULY 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned
AGP for respondents.
2. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable forthwith.
Learned AGP waives service of notice on behalf of all the respondents.
3. With consent of learned Advocate for petitioner and
learned AGP, this matter is taken up for final disposal at the stage of
admission.
4. The grievance of the petitioner in this petition is very
limited. The tribe claim of the petitioner belonging to ‘Mannervarlu’
6839.26wp
(2)
Scheduled Tribe came to be invalidated by respondent No.2/Scheduled
Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee, Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar vide its judgment dated 24/03/2026, on the ground that
petitioner, in spite of several notices sent to him, remained absent for
hearing before the Committee.
5. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that, only one
notice dated 06/10/2025 for appearing before the Committee on
14/10/2025 is received by the petitioner. Earlier notices and the
notices thereafter were not received by the petitioner. He further
submits that a validity certificate has already been issued to the
daughter of his brother, namely, Rajeshri Kachru Phulewad. Because
he could not get notice, he could not produce validity certificate of
tribe. He submits that petitioner undertakes to remain present before
the Scrutiny Committee, if the matter is remanded.
6. Learned AGP vehemently opposes the petition. She
submits that, on four occasions, notices were sent to the petitioner,
however, he did not remain present and it is because of his absence,
there was no alternative to the Committee, but to dismiss/reject his
caste claim. The Committee has considered his matter on merits and
invalidated his claim on that count.
6839.26wp
(3)
7. Upon hearing the respective sides and perusing the record,
the fact remains that the petitioner was not present before the
Committee. Although his absence cannot be condoned, the petitioner
was in service and after his retirement, is now receiving pension for
the post of Assistant Sub Inspector instead of a Police Sub Inspector,
because of non-submission of tribe validity certificate.
8. In view of above, we dispose of this petition by directing
the petitioner to approach respondent No.2/Scrutiny Committee on
15/07/2026 at 11.00 a.m. The Committee shall give hearing to the
petitioner on the same date and pass appropriate order thereafter, as
early as possible. The order of this Court shall be followed
scrupulously. Looking to the conduct of the petitioner, this petition is
allowed with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner
with the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad
within a period of one week from today. Receipt of depositing costs
be shown to the Committee. It is open for the petitioner to approach
the Committee with the documents upon which he wants to rely upon.
[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] [KISHORE C. SANT, J.]
sjk
Checking your session…