1 wp5043.13.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.5043 OF 2013
Ku. Suvarna d/o. Bhaurao Gaikwad,
Aged about 25 years, Occ. Service,
r/o. Tq. Babulgaon, District
Yavatmal. .......... PETITIONER
// VERSUS //
1. The Scheduled Tribe Caste
Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Irvin Chowk, Amravati.
2. The Secretary,
Lalitabai Education Society at
Pulgaon, Distt. Wardha.
3. The Head Mistress,
Lalitabai Murarka High School,
Pulgaon, Distt. Wardha.
::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 :::
2 wp5043.13.odt
4. The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Wardha. .......... RESPONDENTS
____________________________________________________________
Ms Preeti Rane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mrs.M.H.Deshmukh, A.G.P. for Respondent No.4.
____________________________________________________________
CORAM : R.K.DESHPANDE
AND
M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATED : 22nd November, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per R.K.Deshpande, J) :
1. The claim of petitioner for 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe category, which is an entry at Serial No.18 in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribe) Order, 1950 has been invalidated by the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati and the Caste Certificate dt.27.6.2005 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Yavatmal showing the caste of the petitioner as 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe has been invalidated by an order dt.29.5.2013, which is the subject matter of challenge in this petition. ::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 :::
3 wp5043.13.odt
2. Before the Committee, the petitioner produced six documents showing the caste of the petitioner and his blood relatives as 'Mana'. The oldest document is dated 15.5.1945, recording caste as 'Mana' in the name of Shankar Mahadeo, the cousin grand father of the petitioner. The Committee holds that the Police Vigilance Cell inquiry discovers that the caste of the petitioner's paternal aunt and grand father has been recorded as 'Mani' in the Death extract in the years 1958 and 1960 respectively, which is not entry in the list of Scheduled Tribes. The Committee, therefore, applies affinity test and rejected the claim of petitioner for 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe.
3. It is not in dispute that the oldest entry is dated 15.5.1945 in the name of Shankar Maroti, the grand father of the petitioner showing the caste as 'Mana'. It is the pre-constitutional document. Police Vigilance Cell took out two entries : one in the name of Chandrabhaga Shamrao on 10-9-1958 and Shankar Mahadeo in May, 1960, indicating their caste as 'Mani' in the Birth and Death register. The petitioner has denied to have any relations with these two persons. The finding of the Committee that these entries pertain to paternal aunt and grand father of the petitioner is ::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 ::: 4 wp5043.13.odt not at all based upon any evidence. Neither the Police Vigilance Cell report indicates any such inquiry nor the order. We, therefore, cannot sustain the finding of the Committee about relationship of the petitioner with the aforesaid two persons. There is nothing on record to show that the caste of the petitioner or any of his blood relations is recorded other than 'Mana'.
4. The Committee rejected the documents by applying affinity test. The findings of the Committee are two fold -
(a) that the documents produced, though having a probative value, indicate caste as 'Mana' and not as Mana Scheduled Tribe, and,
(b) that entry 'Mani' in the years 1958 and 1960 shows caste other than 'Mana'.
5. In our decision in Writ Petition No.3308 of 2013, Gajanan s/o. Pandurang Shende .vs. The Head Master, Government Ashram School, Dongargaon Salod, dt.8.11.2017, we have held in paragraph no.15 of the said decision that the Committee was clearly in error in holding that 'Mana' community was included ::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 ::: 5 wp5043.13.odt in the list of Other Backward Classes and later on, in the list of Special Backward Classes, and though the petitioner has established that he belongs to 'Mana' community, it is not established that he belongs to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe. For this purpose, we have relied upon the decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mana Adim Jamat Mandal .vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in 2003 (3) Mh.L.J. 513, which is confirmed by the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra and Others .vs. Mana Adim Jamat Mandal reported in (2006) 4 SCC 98.
6. In para no.19 of the decision in the case of Gajanan s/o.Pandurang Shende (cited supra), we have taken a view that the concept of recognized Scheduled Tribe for the purposes of giving benefits and concessions was not prevailing prior to 1950 and, therefore, only caste or community to which a person belonged was stated in the birth, school and revenue records maintained. We have held that the documents were issued in the printed format, which contains a column under the heading 'Caste' and there is no column of tribe. Irrespective of the fact that it is a tribe, the name of tribe is shown in column of caste. While entering the name the distinction between caste and tribe is ignored. It is held that the entire 'Mana' ::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 ::: 6 wp5043.13.odt community all over the State, which is conferred a status of a recognized Scheduled Tribe in the State and no evidence can be led to exclude certain communities of 'Mana' from granting protection or benefits of Scheduled Tribe.
7. Relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of E.V.Chinnaiah .vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others reported in 2004 (9) Scale 316, we have held in paragraph 18 of the decision in Gajanan s/o. Pandurang Shende's case (cited supra) as under :-
"18. Applying the law laid down in E.V. Chinnaiah's case, it has to be held in the facts of the present that once it is clear that 'Mana' community is included in entry No.18 of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, it has to be read as it is, representing a class of 'Mana' as a whole and it is not permissible either for the Executive or for the Scrutiny Committee to artificially sub-divide or sub-classify 'Mana' community as one having different groups, like 'Badwaik Mana', 'Khand Mana', 'Kshatriya Mana', 'Kunbi Mana', 'Maratha Mana', 'Gond Mana', 'Mani/Mane', etc., for the purposes of grant of benefits ::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 ::: 7 wp5043.13.odt available to a recognized Scheduled Tribe. To exclude such persons from the entry 'Mana', to be recognized as Scheduled Tribe, amounts to interference, rearrangement, re-grouping or re-classifying the caste 'Mana', found in the Presidential Order and would be violative not only of Article 342, but also of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The classification of entry 'Mana" in different categories, like 'Badwaik Mana', 'Khand Mana', 'Kshatriya Mana', 'Kunbi Mana', 'Maratha Mana', 'Gond Mana', 'Mani'/'Mane', etc., for the purpose of conferring a status as a recognized Scheduled Tribe is artificial and without any authority. The Committee has, therefore, committed an error in rejecting the claim by holding that the documents produced simply indicate the caste 'Mana' and not 'Mana, Scheduled Tribe'.
8. It is not the case that 'Mani'/'Mane' is an independent caste or a tribe, which exists in the State of Maharashtra. It is also not the caste included in the list of Other Backward Classes or Special Backward Classes published in relation to the State of Maharashtra. Therefore, even assuming that two entries of 'Mani' are ::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 ::: 8 wp5043.13.odt of the blood relatives of the petitioner, those are subsequent to 15.5.1945 - the entry of 'Mana' and the petitioner cannot be denied the claim on the basis of these two entries.
9. In the decision of this Court in the case of Gajanan s/o. Pandurang Shende (cited supra), we have also taken a view relying upon the decision of Apex Court in Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and others , reported in (2012) 1 SCC 113, that where the documents produced on record do not raise any doubt, the Committee cannot reject the same by applying affinity test, which is required to be invoked as a corroborative piece of evidence.
10. In view of above, the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee impugned in this petition cannot, therefore, be sustained. It will have to be quashed and set aside and the petition will have to be allowed. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed and the order is passed as under :
::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 :::
9 wp5043.13.odt
(a) The order dt.29.5.2013 passed by the
Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati/respondent no.1 is hereby quashed and set aside.
(b) It is declared that the Certificate dt.27.6.2005 produced by the petitioner and issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Yavatmal is held to be valid and it is further declared that the petitioner has established her claim for 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe category, which is an entry at Serial No.18 in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950.
(c) The Committee is directed to issue Caste Validity Certificate to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
11. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE [jaiswal] ::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 ::: 10 wp5043.13.odt ::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 :::