1
wp2725.02.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.2725 of 2002
Gaurav s/o Dilip Tikas,
Aged about 18 years,
Occupation - Student,
R/o. 7/31, NIT Colony,
Atre Layout, Pratap Nagar,
Nagpur. ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Committee,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee,
Adiwasi Vikas Bhawan,
Giripeth,
Nagpur.
3. Director, Medical Education & Research,
Maharashtra State, Mumbai.
4. Director, Technical Education,
Maharashtra State, Mumbai. ... Respondents
None for Petitioner.
Shri V.P. Maldhure, Assistant Government Pleader for
Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
::: Uploaded on - 30/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 01/07/2017 01:08:20 :::
2
wp2725.02.odt
Coram : R.K. Deshpande & Mrs. Swapna Joshi, JJ.
th Dated : 29 June, 2017 Oral Judgment (Per R.K. Deshpande, J.) :
1. The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 30-4-2002 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur, invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to 'Halba' (Scheduled Tribe).
2. We have gone through the impugned order passed by the Scrutiny Committee, which relies upon the documents pertaining to the period 1930, 1936, 1937 and 1949, i.e. Prior to issuance of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribe) Order, 1950 in the name of the maternal uncle of the petitioner's father. The Committee does not record its finding on the documents at serial Nos.7 and 8, which are in the name of the father of the petitioner, issued in the year 1961 and 1965, showing the caste of the petitioner's father as Halba. Though the document at serial No.6, i.e. the birth certificate of the petitioner's father issued on 28-9-1956, has been considered, the finding is that the ::: Uploaded on - 30/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 01/07/2017 01:08:20 ::: 3 wp2725.02.odt possibility of reservation cannot be denied in view of this document, applying the socio-cultural traits, ethnic linkage, affinity test and police vigilance cell report, the claim is rejected.
3. In our view, in terms of the definition of 'relative' under Rule 2(f) of the Maharashtra Scheduled Tribes (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Certificate Rules, 2003, 'relative' means a blood relative from paternal side. The Committee has, therefore, committed an error in relying upon the documents from the maternal side of the petitioner's father. So far as the question of applying the affinity test is concerned, in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and others, reported in 2011(6) Mh.L.J. 919, the affinity test depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case and no strait-jacket formula can be adopted. In view of this position, the impugned order passed by the Committee cannot be sustained.
4. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order ::: Uploaded on - 30/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 01/07/2017 01:08:20 ::: 4 wp2725.02.odt passed by the Scrutiny Committee on 30-4-2002, is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Committee for decision afresh after giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard and after following the procedure prescribed by the law.
5. Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to costs.
JUDGE. JUDGE.
Lanjewar
::: Uploaded on - 30/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 01/07/2017 01:08:20 :::