Bombay High Court
Sanjay Maroti Gaddamwar vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 9 October, 2025
Author: R. G. Avachat
Bench: R. G. Avachat
1 989.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
989 WRIT PETITION NO. 786 OF 2025
Dilip Maroti Gaddamwad
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
...
Mr. S. M. Kulkarni, Advocate for the Petitioners
Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, AGP for Respondents/State
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 14117 OF 2024
...
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 769 OF 2025
...
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13512 OF 2024
...
CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT AND
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATED : OCTOBER 09, 2025 P.C.:
1. Heard.
2. After having heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners and the learned AGP for Respondents/State it was brought to our notice that Respondent No.2-Committee had taken assistance of an Interpreter/Translator to translate the revenue record in Modi script to Marathi. The expert gave his opinion and Respondent No.2-Committee recorded the same. The opinion given by the expert had been strongly relied on by Respondent/Committee to dislodge the petitioner Sanjay's claim. The record indicates that the copy of the expert's opinion or so called statement recorded by Respondent No.2-Committee was not Narwade/
2 989.odt given to the Petitioner-Sanjay nor there is anything to indicate that Sanjay was offered an opportunity to cross-examine / counter the opinion of the expert. As such, one of the facets of the principles of natural justice is found to have become casualty. So far as regards other aspects of the matter and particularly school record of Maroti Gaddamwar is concerned less said the better, since any our observations in that regard may influence the Committee either way.
3. In view of the above, the orders impugned in all the Writ Petitions are hereby set aside. All the matters are remitted back to Respondent No.2-Committee. Respondent No.2-Committee shall give the respective petitioners an opportunity of hearing and adducing any material in support of their respective claims and decide the same afresh/de novo on its own merits within a period of eight months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order.
4. Since by this order, the validity which was granted in favour of the petitioner-Sanjay gets restored, the petitioners who are in public employment/service shall give necessary undertakings as were directed by this Court on 11.07.2024 in Writ Petition No. 7072 of 2024 when the matter was remanded with the consent of the parties.
5. With these directions, Writ Petitions disposed.
[ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.] [R. G. AVACHAT, J.] Narwade/