Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Subhash Ganpatrao Nandanwar vs Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny ... on 30 March, 2021

Author: Sunil B. Shukre

Bench: Sunil B. Shukre, Avinash G. Gharote

                                                                         9.wp.1501.2021.odt
                                              1

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                               WRIT PETITION NO.1501/2021

          Subhash Ganpatrao Nandanwar,
          Aged : 63 Years, Occupation: Retired,
          R/o Samraspura, Achalpur,
          Tq. Achalpur, District : Amravati.                  .... PETITIONER

                                      // VERSUS //

 1.      Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny
         Committee, Irvin Chowk, Amravati,
         Tq. and District : Amravati.

 2.      Jagdambha Mahavidyalaya,
         Achalpur, through its Principal,
         Tah. Achalpur, District : Achalpur.                  .... RESPONDENTS

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Shri M. D. Lakhey, Advocate for petitioner.
          Shri N. R. Patil, AGP for respondent no.1.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                                   CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
                                           AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.
                                   DATE   :   30/03/2021


 ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER:- SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)

1] Heard Shri Lakhey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Patil, learned AGP, who appears by waiving notice for respondent no.1.

2] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. ::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 01/04/2021 21:08:17 :::

9.wp.1501.2021.odt 2 3] Heard finally by consent of the parties present before the Court.

4] Notice has not been issued to respondent no.2 as no relief has been claimed against respondent no.2. 5] The relief claimed here is of limited nature and therefore, this petition is allowed in terms of prayers clause (i). The respondent no.1 is directed to decide the caste claim of petitioner within eight weeks from the date of the order, in accordance with law. 6] It is made clear here that the claim of the petitioner is pending for its verification in this case since last seven years and therefore, no further time shall be granted to respondent no.1 for deciding the same in accordance with law within the period stipulated as above.

Rule accordingly. No costs.

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J) (SUNIL B. SHUKRE J.) Sarkate.

::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 01/04/2021 21:08:17 :::