Poonam Dhondiram Nagrale vs. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
Facts
The petitioner, Poonam Dhondiram Nagrale, challenged an order dated 07.03.2025 by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee (respondent No. 2) which refused to validate her ‘Koli Mahadev’ scheduled tribe certificate. The petitioner's case was decided based on the reply filed in the matter of her first-degree cousin, Megharani Ganpat Nagrale. Vigilance enquiry was conducted in Megharani's case. Megharani had initially faced invalidation but was later held entitled to a validity certificate by an order dated 21.08.2019 in writ petition No. 9187 of 2019. The court noted that the same set of evidence was scrutinized for both the petitioner and Megharani.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition partly, quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and order dated 07.03.2025. The Court held that for the selfsame reasons as recorded by a coordinate division bench in the matter of Megharani Ganpat Nagrale, the petitioner is entitled to have a certificate of validity. The Committee was directed to issue a certificate of validity to the petitioner for the ‘Koli Mahadev’ scheduled tribe. This issuance is made subject to the final outcome of any matter that the Committee has decided to re-open. The petitioner was explicitly stated to not be entitled to claim equities.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee erred in refusing to validate the petitioner's ‘Koli Mahadev’ scheduled tribe certificate, considering the evidence and the outcome in the case of her first-degree cousin, Megharani Ganpat Nagrale, and the provisions of the relevant Scheduled Tribe regulations. The petitioner argued that since the same set of evidence was subject to scrutiny in the case of her first-degree cousin, Megharani, and Megharani was ultimately granted a validity certificate, the petitioner should also be entitled to one. The petitioner relied on the principle that similar facts and evidence should lead to similar outcomes. The revenue or State did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
957 WP NO. 3706 OF 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3706 OF 2025 POONAM DHONDIRAM NAGRALE VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI.
THE SCHEDULED TRIBE CERTIFICATE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE KINWAT, HEAD QUARTER AT CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR, THROUGH ITS DY. DIRECTOR (R), DIST. SAMBHAJINGAR.
THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI, 8TH FLOOR, VIKRIKAR BHAVAN, MAZGAON, MUMBAI
THE ADD. COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI, OPPOSITE GOLF CLUB, AIRPORT ROAD, YERWADA, PUNE, DIST. PUNE.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE TAX COMMISSIONERATE, VAT ADMINISTRATION OFFICE, GST BHAVAN, HOTAGI ROAD, SOLAPUR, DIST. SOLAPUR. … Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Mahadevappa Vibhute AGP for Respondents/State : Mr. S. R. Wakale … CORAM :
MANGESH S. PATIL & Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ. DATE : 18.03.2025 PER COURT : . Issue notice. The learned AGP waives service for all respondents. On the joint request, the matter is heard finally at the stage
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.