1 WP1063-04.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.1063/2004
...
Moreshwar s/o Laxmanrao Jambulkar,
Age 26 years, Occ: Student,
R/o Post - Wadagaon, Tq. Warud,
Distt. Amravati. .. PETITIONER
.. Versus ..
The Committee for Scrutiny and
Verification of Tribe Claims,
Irvin Square, Amravati. .. RESPONDENT
None for the Petitioner.
Shri N.R. Rode, A.G.P. for Respondent.
....
CORAM : R.K. Deshpande & Manish Pitale, JJ.
DATED : September 14, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (per R.K. Deshpande, J. )
1. The challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 25.07.2003 passed by the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Amravati, invalidating the claim of the petitioner for Arakh, a Scheduled Tribe Category, which is ::: Uploaded on - 18/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/09/2017 01:24:32 ::: 2 WP1063-04.odt an Entry at Sr. No.18 in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. The claim of the petitioner was verified as the petitioner wanted to pursue his education as a candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribe Category. The Committee has invalidated the caste certificate dated 13.07.2001 produced by the petitioner and one of the grounds to set it aside is that the controversy is covered by the decision of the Apex Court in Dadaji @ Dina .vs. Sukhadeobabu and others reported in AIR 1980 Supreme Court 150, in which it was held that the Entry No.18 in the Scheduled Tribes Order in relation to the State of Maharashtra, contains various sub castes of main caste Gond and only those having affinity with Gond can be considered as Scheduled Tribe.
2. In the subsequent decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra and others .vs. Mana Adim Jamat Mandal reported in (2006) 4 Supreme Court Cases 98, it is held that each tribe mentioned in entry No.18 is a separate tribe and is not a sub tribe of main tribe i.e. Gond. In view of the said decision, it is not necessary to establish an affinity with Gond. If the claim is for Arakh Scheduled Tribe which is included in Entry No.18, then affinity with Arakh is required to be established. The decision of the Apex Court in ::: Uploaded on - 18/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/09/2017 01:24:32 ::: 3 WP1063-04.odt the case of Dadaji @ Dina .vs. Sukhadeobabu and others (supra) has been specifically held to be impliedly overruled in the decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra .vs. Milind reported in (2001) 1 Supreme Court Cases 4.
3. In view of the aforesaid decision, the order impugned cannot be sustained and it will have to be set aside with an order of remand for consideration afresh.
4. We, therefore, allow this writ petition, quash and set aside the order dated 25.07.2003 passed by the Scrutiny Committee and direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the petitioner afresh, keeping in view the fact that the decision of the Apex Court in Dadaji @ Dina .vs. Sukhadeobabu and others has been overruled and remains no longer a good law.
5. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.
(Manish Pitale, J. ) (R.K. Deshpande, J.) ...
halwai/p.s.
::: Uploaded on - 18/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/09/2017 01:24:32 :::