Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

MUNDEWADI GAJALA AJAJ AHMEDversusTHE DIVISIONAL CASTE CERTIFICATE AND ORS.

Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution as the petitioner failed to cooperate with counsel.

Summary

The petitioner, Mundewadi Gajala Ajaj Ahmed, filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Caste Scrutiny Committee dated 29 June 2015, which rejected her claim of belonging to the OBC category "Julaha" for admission to a pharmacy course. The committee found that the entry of "Julaha" in her caste certificate was made after the due date and was not reflected in her father's school records. The petitioner’s counsel reported that the petitioner was unresponsive and had not provided instructions to continue the litigation. The court observed that the petitioner appeared to have lost interest in pursuing the petition. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution, and the pending civil/interim applications were also disposed of.

Issues considered

  • What is the validity of the Caste Scrutiny Committee's order rejecting the petitioner’s OBC claim?
  • Whether the writ petition can proceed in the absence of the petitioner’s instructions to counsel?

Subjects

  • OBC
  • Caste certificate
  • Writ petition
  • Want of prosecution
  • Admission eligibility
  • Caste Scrutiny Committee

Judgment

                                                                         20-9357-15-wp.doc


                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                 WRIT PETITION NO. 9357 OF 2015
                                              WITH
                             CIVIL APPLICATION IN WP NO. 787 OF 2018
                                                IN
                                 WRIT PETITION NO. 9357 OF 2015

              Mundewadi Gajala Ajaj Ahmed                            ....Petitioner
                   Vs.
              The Divisional Caste Certificate & Ors.               ....Respondents

              Mr. Shivaji Kokare i/b Mr. Vishwanath Talkute, advocate for the
              Petitioner
              Mr. Ravi P. Kadam, ‘B’ Panel counsel for Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 5.

                                         CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, &
                                                 ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
                                         DATE     : 24 AUGUST 2026

              P. C. :


              1.        Mr. Shivaji Kokare, learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits

IRESH
              that his client is not responding to the calls made by his office;
MASHAL


 Digitally
              therefore, he has no instructions to argue the present Writ Petition.
 signed by
 IRESH
 MASHAL
 Date:
 2026.08.24
 18:56:05
 +0530
              2.        By the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner challenges the

              order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee on 29 June 2015.


              3.        Since there are no instructions from the Petitioner to her

              Advocate to conduct the present Writ Petition, it seems that she has


                                                 1 of 2
Iresh
                                                           20-9357-15-wp.doc


lost interest in pursuing the Writ Petition any further.


4.    The Petitioner had claimed belonging to the OBC category

from the caste "Julaha", which is in the OBC-57 notified category

and had taken the benefit of the same for seeking admission in

Respondent No. 2 – College for the B. Pharmacy course, which is a

four-year course.


5.    The      Vigilance   Cell/Committee      had     conducted        an

inquiry/survey on 29 June 2015, whereby her claim was rejected as

the entry of "Julaha" in the certificate was after the due date and did

not find place in the school record of the father of the Petitioner.


6.    In view of the above, the Writ Petition stands dismissed for

want of prosecution.


7.    In sequel, the pending Civil/Interim Applications also stand

disposed of.



[ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.]                         [RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]




                                 2 of 2


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.