CHAITNYA GOVIND WAGHMODE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER — WP/3109/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 24th March 2026.
CNR: HCBM030108222026
Filing Number
WP/8082/2026
Filing Date
16-Mar-2026
Registration No
WP/3109/2026
Registration Date
23-Mar-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More , Hon'ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. Shinde
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More , Hon'ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. Shinde
Bench Type
Division
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
24-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Last updated 07-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.CHAITNYA GOVIND WAGHMODE
Adv. JADHAVAR PRATAP V.
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
-
2.THE SCHEDULED TRIBE CERTIFICATE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE, CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR DIVISION-2
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
24-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More,hon'ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. ShindeView PDF
The High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent Scrutiny Committee to expeditiously decide the petitioner's claim of belonging to the "Koli Mahadev" Scheduled Tribe, preferably by end of July 2026, considering the petitioner's need to pursue professional higher studies. The petition was allowed with this directive without substantive adjudication on the tribe claim itself. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Mar-2026
Petitions For Admission - Fresh CIVIL Side Matters
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More , Hon'ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. Shinde
-
16-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP/3109/2026
The High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent Scrutiny Committee to expeditiously decide the petitioner's claim of belonging to the "Koli Mahadev" Scheduled Tribe, preferably by end of July 2026, considering the petitioner's need to pursue professional higher studies. The petition was allowed with this directive without substantive adjudication on the tribe claim itself. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts