Bombay High Court
AADITYA S/O GAJANAN SONAWANEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. SEC TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to a caste validity certificate as a Mahadeo Koli Scheduled Tribe, and the Scrutiny Committee’s order is quashed.
Summary
The petitioner, Aditya Gajanan Sonawane, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a caste validity certificate confirming his status as a Mahadeo Koli Scheduled Tribe. He relied on a prior judgment (Om Krishnaraj Sonawane v. State of Maharashtra) where the court quashed a similar order of the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee and directed issuance of a certificate to the petitioner’s cousin. The court observed that the petitioner is a close blood relative of the cousin and that the earlier order is applicable to his case. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned order of the Scrutiny Committee and directed it to issue a caste validity certificate to the petitioner within four weeks. No costs were awarded and the petition was disposed of in the petitioner’s favour.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a Scheduled Tribe (Mahadeo Koli) validity certificate based on the certificate issued to his close blood relative.
- Whether the order of the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee dated 4 September 2025 can be set aside under Article 226 of the Constitution.
- Whether the precedent set in Om Krishnaraj Sonawane v. State of Maharashtra is binding on the present petition.
Subjects
- Scheduled Tribe
- Caste Validity Certificate
- Article 226
- Writ Petition
- Quash Order
- Genealogical Proof
- Mahadeo Koli
Judgment
904-WP-9532-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 9532 of 2026
Aditya Gajanan Sonawane ...Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
_________
Mr. Sahil Choudhari for Petitioner.
Mr. P. P. Kakade, Addl. G.P. a/w Priyanka B. Chavan, AGP for State.
__________
Digitally
signed by
PRASHANT
PRASHANT VILAS
VILAS
RANE
RANE
Date:
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
2026.07.31
13:25:19
+0530
AARTI SATHE, JJ.
DATE: 27 JULY 2026.
P.C.
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed praying for the
following substantive reliefs:
(A) Call for record and proceedings of the enquiry.
(B) Quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the
Respondent No.2 Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nashik-2,
dated 04th September 2025 thereby invalidating his tribe claim as belonging
to Koli Mahadev and for that purpose issue necessary orders.
(C) Hold and declare that, the petitioner belongs to Koli Mahadev
Scheduled Tribe and further be pleased to direct the respondent No.2
Committee to issue tribe validity certificate to the petitioner and for that
purpose issue necessary orders.”
2. At the outset learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to
a judgment dated 16 February 2026 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in the case of the petitioner’s cousin brother in “Om Krishnaraj Sonawane
Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.” 1 (‘Exhibit F’ to the petition). By the said
order the Division Bench has set aside the order passed by the Caste Scrutiny
1 Writ Petition No.16611/2025
Page 1 of 3
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane
904-WP-9532-2026.DOC
Committee. The relevant observations as made by the Division Bench in allowing
the said petition are required to be noted which read thus:
“3. It is the submission of learned AGP that the vigilance cell inquiry
was not done in the case of father. So far as the Petitioner’s aunt namely
Vaishali Ramchandra Sonawane is concerned, though the then Scrutiny
Committee issued the “Validity Certificate”, the present Scrutiny Committee
observed several discrepancies in the documents. The vigilance inquiry was
conducted in Vaishali’s case. However, the Scrutiny Committee noticed
several discrepancies in the surname of the Petitioner’s aunt which according
to the Committee should have dissuaded the then Scrutiny Committee in
issuing the “Certificate of Validity” in favour of Petitioner’s aunt-Vaishali.
4. Thus, in our opinion, on the strength of the “Certificate of
Validity” issued to the Petitioner’s father and his aunt, the Petitioner being
close blood relative should be issued with the “Certificate of Validity” as
belonging to “Mahadeo Koli Scheduled Tribe”. Merely because a show cause
notice being issued to te Petitioner’s father, is no reason to assume at this
juncture that the “Caste Validity Certificate” would be recalled or cancelled.
The show cause notice shall obviously be taken to its logical conclusion. The
“Certificate of Validity” issued to the Petitioner’s father and his aunt from the
paternal side is valid and subsisting. In such view of the matter, the issuance of
“Certificate of Validity” to the Petitioner can be made subject to the outcome
of the show cause notice issued to the close blood relatives.
5. The Petition is, accordingly, allowed. The impugned order dated
4th September 2025 passed by the Respondent No.2 – Scrutiny Committee is
quashed and set aside. The Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue the
“Validity Certificate” to the Petitioner as belonging to “Mahadeo Koli
Scheduled Tribe” within a period of six weeks from the date of
communication of this order.
6. It is made clear that the “Certificate of Validity” issued to the
petitioner is subject to the outcome of the show cause notice referred to
hereinabove and the same consequences upon its adjudication shall follow
even in the case of Petitioner. The show cause notice be decided on its own
merits and in accordance with law. All contentions herein are kept open.”
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Caste Scrutiny
Committee has, in fact, passed a common order in the case of the petitioner as
also his cousin brother-Om Krishnaraj Sonawane who is the petitioner in the said
petition decided by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The impugned order
(Exhibit E to the petition at page 44) reflects that this is a common order in
respect of Aditya Gajanan Sonawane, the petitioner herein and Om Krishnaraj
Page 2 of 3
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane
904-WP-9532-2026.DOC
Sonawane-Cousin brother of the petitioner. Considering the observations as made
by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, it also appears to be not in dispute that, in the
genealogy produced before the Caste Scrutiny Committee, the petitioner is shown
as the cousin brother of Om Krishnaraj Sonawane and vice versa.
4. In this view of the matter, Mr. Kakade, learned Additional Government
Pleader appearing for the State, also submits that the petitioner’s case stands
covered by the orders passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.16611 of 2025
(supra).
5. Considering such consensus and the factual undisputed position, the
benefits of the orders passed by the co-ordinate Bench is also rendered to the
petitioner.
6. In this view of the matter, we allow this petition in terms of the order
passed by the co-ordinate Bench in “Om Krishnaraj Sonawane Vs. The State of
Maharashtra & Anr.” (supra).
7. We accordingly direct the Caste Scrutiny Committee to issue a caste
validity certificate to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today.
8. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Page 3 of 3
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane
Checking your session…