SATYASHIL MOTIRAM KAMBLE v. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT. AND ORS
Court: Bombay High Court
Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNI,HON'BLE MS JUSTICE AARTI A. SATHE
Judgment date:
Case summary
Bombay High Court judgment dated 2026-01-17. SATYASHIL MOTIRAM KAMBLE v. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT. AND ORS. Read the judgment and...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 11205 OF 2019 Satyashil Motiram Kamble ... Petitioner Versus The Additional Commissioner Tribal Development Dept. And Ors ... Respondents _______ Mr. Shekhar Jagtap a/w Ms. Sairuchita Chowdhary i/b. J. Shekhar Associates, for Petitioner. Ms. D. S. Deshmukhm AGP for Respondent No. 1 & 3-State. _______ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ. DATE: 17 JANUARY 2026 P. C. 1. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking the following substantive reliefs: a) This Hon'ble Court may kindly issue writ of certiorari and/ or any other appropriate writ and/or direction and/or order and thereby quash and set aside the Final Merit List dated 31. 08. 2019 b) This Hon'ble Court may kindly issue writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ and thereby order/ direct the Respondent No.
1 to publish a new Final Merit List and declare the Final Selection Status of the Petitioner; c) This Hon'ble Court may kindly issue writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ and thereby order/direct the Respondent No. 1 to appoint the Petitioner to the post of Warden (Male) of the Tribal Ashram Schools and Hostels as it has clearly been established that the petitioner stood first amongst SC- General 1 Category and therefore is entitled to the reserved seat under the SC-General 1 category; d) This Hon'ble Court may kindly issue writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ and thereby order/ direct the Mane Respondent No. 1 to handover the Letter of Appointment to the petitioner; 2. We are informed by the learned counsel for the Respondent that, as per the final merit list, in respect of which relief is sought, appointment letters have already been issued and the selected candidates have already joined.
In this position, it would not be possible for this Court to grant any of the reliefs prayed for in the Petition. However, it is open to the Petitioner to challenge the appointment of Respondent No. 2 in independent substantive proceedings . 3. All contentions of the parties in that regard are expressly kept open. 4. The Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs. (AARTI SATHE, J. ) (G. S. KULKARNI, J. ) Mane
Source: Bombay High Court. Archive: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.