KISHOR S/O RAJESHWAR SONKUSARE vs THE S.T. CASTE CERTIFICATE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE, THR. MEMBER SECRETARY, GADCHIROLI AND OTHERS Advocate - GOVERNMENT PLEADER — CAW/1171/2026

Case under Other Act Section 00. Disposed: --C.A. Disposed off on 11th June 2026.

CNR: HCBM040150102026

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

03rd June 2026

Filing Number

CAW/10201/2026

Filing Date

29-04-2026

Registration No

CAW/1171/2026

Registration Date

06-05-2026

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE URMILA JOSHI PHALKE , HON'BLE JUSTICE NIVEDITA PRAKASH MEHTA

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE URMILA JOSHI PHALKE , HON'BLE JUSTICE NIVEDITA PRAKASH MEHTA

Bench Type

Division

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

11th June 2026

Nature of Disposal

--C.A. Disposed off

Acts & Sections

Other Act Section 00

Petitioner(s)

KISHOR S/O RAJESHWAR SONKUSARE

Adv. R S PARSODKAR

Respondent(s)

THE S.T. CASTE CERTIFICATE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE, THR. MEMBER SECRETARY, GADCHIROLI AND OTHERS Advocate - GOVERNMENT PLEADER

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE URMILA JOSHI PHALKE , HON'BLE JUSTICE NIVEDITA PRAKASH MEHTA

03-06-2026

Orders

11-06-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE URMILA JOSHI PHALKE,HON'BLE JUSTICE NIVEDITA PRAKASH MEHTA

The Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) granted the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee a fifth and final extension of three months to decide petitioner Kishor Sonkusare's caste claim, citing recently received forensic science laboratory reports with discrepancies requiring consideration. The court imposed a Rs. 5,000 cost deposit and warned that failure to decide within this extended period would result in serious consequences as previously warned. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) granted the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee a fifth and final extension of three months to decide petitioner Kishor Sonkusare's caste claim, citing recently received forensic science laboratory reports with discrepancies requiring consideration. The court imposed a Rs. 5,000 cost deposit and warned that failure to decide within this extended period would result in serious consequences as previously warned. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Other Act All acts →

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case