INDRAJEET SHEKAPPA JAMADAR vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — WP/6539/2018
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 04th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030219342018
Filing Number
WP/17181/2018
Filing Date
20-Jun-2018
Registration No
WP/6539/2018
Registration Date
26-Jun-2018
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
04-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Last updated 15-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.INDRAJEET SHEKAPPA JAMADAR
Adv. BAYAS ANANDSINGH SANGRAMSINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Adv. ,SALVE AVINASH RANGNATHRAO,SALVE AVINASH RANGNATHRAO,GP FOR R.1 AND 2 1123
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
04-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More,hon'ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. ShindeView PDF
The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) directed the Scrutiny Committee to expeditiously decide the petitioner's pending tribe claim for 'Koli Mahadev' scheduled tribe status within four months, recognizing that the claim had been pending since 2013. The court maintained the service protection previously granted and required the petitioner to cooperate with the committee, noting that such protection would only continue until the claim was decided and the petitioner could not claim additional benefits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
09-Jul-2020
Due Admission CIVIL
According To Sitting List
-
27-Jun-2018
Hon'ble Shri Justice R. M. Borde,hon'ble Shri Justice Arun M. DhavaleView PDF
-
27-Jun-2018
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
20-Jun-2018
Case filed
Registration No. WP/6539/2018
The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) directed the Scrutiny Committee to expeditiously decide the petitioner's pending tribe claim for 'Koli Mahadev' scheduled tribe status within four months, recognizing that the claim had been pending since 2013. The court maintained the service protection previously granted and required the petitioner to cooperate with the committee, noting that such protection would only continue until the claim was decided and the petitioner could not claim additional benefits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts