Bombay High Court

RAHUL KISHOR PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND ANR

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: KISHORE C SANT AJIT B KADETHANKAR

Holding

The Court directed the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee to decide the petitioner's claim within four weeks.

Summary

The petitioner, Rahul Kishor Patil, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee to decide his claim within a stipulated period. He alleged that while a vigilance cell report concerning his brother's claim had been accepted, the same report for his own claim had not been considered. The Court examined the petition and noted the pending verification of the petitioner’s claim. It held that it was appropriate to direct the Committee to decide the petitioner's claim within four weeks from the date of the order. Accordingly, the Court issued a directive to the Committee to dispose of the matter within the specified time. The writ petition was thereafter disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the Court should direct the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee to decide the petitioner's claim within a specific time frame

Subjects

Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Verification Committee
Writ Petition
Administrative Direction
Timely Decision

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:31181-DB

1 9-wp 8336-2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 8336 OF 2026

Rahul Kishor Patil .. Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra
Through Its Secretary And Another .. Respondents

Mr. Chandrakant R. Thorat, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. A. S. Shinde, Addl.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND
AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.
DATE : 27th JULY, 2026.

PER COURT :-

1. Heard.

2. This petition is filed seeking direction to the

respondent/Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee to

decide the claim of the petitioner within stipulated period. It is

shown that the vigilance cell report is already submitted in respect

of the petitioner and his brother. Though his brother’s claim is

now closed for orders, however, the said vigilance cell report is

still not accepted for the present petitioner.

3. Considering above, we find it appropriate to request the
2 9-wp 8336-2026.odt

committee to decide the claim of the petitioner within four weeks

from today.

4. With this, the writ petition stands disposed of.

( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.) ( KISHORE C. SANT, J. )

P.S.B.

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…