Members Of Maharashtra SC & ST Commission Appointed, Commission Functional: State Tells Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has disposed of a PIL that sought the appointment of Chairman and Members to the Maharashtra State Commission of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, noting that the State government has appointed the members.A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Arif S. Doctor took note of the State's affidavit indicating that the Chairman and 2 members have been...
The Bombay High Court has disposed of a PIL that sought the appointment of Chairman and Members to the Maharashtra State Commission of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, noting that the State government has appointed the members.
A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Arif S. Doctor took note of the State's affidavit indicating that the Chairman and 2 members have been appointed to the Commission through a Government Resolution (GR) dated 16 September 2024. The affidavit said that the Commission is functioning now.
The Commission was constituted by a Government Resolution on 01 March 2020. The role of the Commission is to study the current social, economic, educational and political conditions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and provide suggestions to the State government for their improvement. Additionally, the Commission can also investigate grievances raised by members from SC and ST communities.
The grievance of the petitioner was that the Chairman and other members of the Commission were not appointed since 03 December 2020 and thus the complaints raised by SC & ST communities were not being addressed.
On September 04 2024, the Court had directed the State government to file a reply as to why the Chairman and members of the Maharashtra State Commission of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes have not been appointed since December 2020.
During the hearing today, the petitioner's counsel raised objections to the appointments and submitted that the appointed members do not meet the requisite qualifications. However, the Court stated that the petitioner has a liberty to seek an independent cause of action.
In view of the above, the Court disposed of the petition.
Case title: Sagar Dnyaneshwar Shinde vs. Secretary Maharashtra State Commission And Ors (PIL/110/2024)
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 67