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
Next Hearing
27th June 2018
Filing Number
WP/17181/2018
Filing Date
20-06-2018
Registration No
WP/6539/2018
Registration Date
26-06-2018
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
04th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
INDRAJEET SHEKAPPA JAMADAR
Adv. BAYAS ANANDSINGH SANGRAMSINGH
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Adv. ,SALVE AVINASH RANGNATHRAO,SALVE AVINASH RANGNATHRAO,GP FOR R.1 AND 2 1123
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABASAHEB D. SHINDE
DUE ADMISSION CIVIL
URGENT CIRCULATION - CIVIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-07-2020 | DUE ADMISSION CIVIL |
| 27-06-2018 | URGENT CIRCULATION - CIVIL |
Orders
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.
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.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts