Bombay High Court
Madhukar S/O Shankar Jawanjal vs The Vice-Chairman/ Member- Secretary, ... on 7 May, 2026
Author: M.S. Jawalkar
Bench: M.S. Jawalkar
2026:BHC-NAG:7098-DB
J-wp4610.23 final.odt 1/12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION No.4610 OF 2023
Madhukar S/o Shankar Jawanjal,
Aged about 60 years, Occ. Retired,
R/o Wankhede Nagar, Dabki Road,
Old City, Akola. : PETITIONER
...VERSUS...
1. The Vice-Chairman/Member-Secretary,
Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Chaprashipura,
Amravati.
2. The Deputy Director General of
Meteorology, Regional Meteorological
Centre, DBAI Airport, Sonegaon,
Nagpur-440005. : RESPONDENTS
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ms. Preeti Rane, Advocate for Petitioner.
Ms. H.N. Jaipurkar, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent
No.1.
Mr. C.J. Dhumane, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
CORAM : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR AND
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 20th APRIL, 2026.
PRONOUNCED ON : 07th MAY, 2026.
JUDGMENT :(Per : NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties.
J-wp4610.23 final.odt 2/12
2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 15.09.2021 passed by the respondent No.1 Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati (for short "the Scrutiny Committee"), in Case No. 5/501/Ser/102018/114946, invalidating his caste claim as belonging to "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe, enlisted at Sr. No.44 of the Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950.
3. The brief facts of the case are as under :
The petitioner was appointed on the post of "Chowkidar" from the Scheduled Tribe category by respondent No.2 Deputy Director General of Meteorology, Regional Meteorological Centre, Nagpur in a temporary capacity with effect from forenoon of 05.10.1984. The petitioner forwarded the proposal for caste verification on 01.08.2018. Earlier, the petitioner had filed Writ Petition No.5666/2018 seeking directions to the Scrutiny Committee to decide his claim within a stipulated time, whereupon this Court passed order on 18.12.2018 directing the Committee accordingly.
4. In compliance of the order dated 18.12.2018 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.5331/2018, the service of the petitioner was restored vide Order No.XA-015/Gen.Misc/Vol.VII/ J-wp4610.23 final.odt 3/12 795 dated 22.12.2018, subject to the condition that in case his claim is invalidated by the Committee, his service shall stand dismissed. The Police Vigilance Cell conducted inquiry and submitted its report on 06.07.2021. The petitioner filed reply to the vigilance report on 09.08.2021. The petitioner was called for hearing on 10.08.2021 and was present.
5. The Scrutiny Committee passed the impugned order dated 15.09.2021 invalidating the caste claim on the grounds of documentary evidence, affinity, and area restriction. The petitioner retired from service on 31.08.2021 and the pension and retiral benefits have not been released by respondent No.2 on account of non-submission of the validity certificate. The petitioner vide communications dated 07.12.2021 and 15.06.2023 requested respondent No.2 for release of pension and retiral benefits; however, the same have not been released till date.
6. The following pre-constitutional documents were submitted by the petitioner before the Scrutiny Committee :
Sr Document Year No.
1 Extract of Kotwal Book of grandfather Pundlik 1947 (D.O.B. 14.04.1947) 2 Extract of Sale Deed in respect of petitioner's 01.12.1947 family J-wp4610.23 final.odt 4/12
7. We have heard Ms. Preeti Rane, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. H.N. Jaipurkar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 and Mr. C.J. Dhumane, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner possesses a pre-constitutional document of the year 1947 in the form of an extract of the Kotwal Book, which clearly mentions the caste as "Thakur" and carries the greatest probative value. It is submitted that the said document was not disputed in the first inquiry by the Vigilance Cell and was procured by the Vigilance Officer himself during the course of inquiry.
9. It is submitted that the invalidation on the ground of area restriction is unsustainable in view of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976 and the J-wp4610.23 final.odt 5/12 Government of Maharashtra Circular of 1977, removing all area restrictions. It is submitted that the Scrutiny Committee, Amravati has no expert, no anthropological or ethnological traits, and no research material pertaining to the "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe, as is evident from the Committee's own RTI reply dated 01.07.2005, and the inquiry is therefore contrary to the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madhuri Patil's case (supra) and the Full Bench of this Court in Shilpa Thakur Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2009(3) Mh.L.J. 995.
10. It is submitted that affinity alone cannot be the sole criterion and the Committee failed to give due weightage to the documentary evidence. Reliance is placed on Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarkshan Samiti Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2013(2) Mh.L.J. 785, Anand Katole, 2011(6) Mh.L.J. (SC) 919, Jaywant Dilip Pawar in Civil Appeal No. 2336/2011 dated 08.03.2017, State of Maharashtra Vs. Milind (2001), Pandurang Rangnath Chavan Vs. State of Maharashtra, 1998(2) Mh.L.J. 802, and the judgments of this Court in W.P. Nos. 6142/2017, 10056/2019 & 13073/2021.
11. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 submits that the Vigilance Cell, during the course of inquiry, obtained documents adverse to the claim of the J-wp4610.23 final.odt 6/12 petitioner. The details of the adverse documents are as under :
Sr Document Name Relations Caste Date No hip Entry 1 School Record Z.P. Shankar (Thakur) Primary Marathi School, Babhulgaon (Jabo), Akola 2 School Leaving Shankar Brother Hindu 01.07.1975 Certificate Extract, Digamber (Thakur) Babhulgaon School Thakur 3 School Leaving Omprakash Nephew Hindu 17.06.1992 Certificate Extract, Digamber (Thakur) Gram Vikas Vidyalay, Thakur Babhulgaon
12. It is submitted that the above post-independence entries consistently record the caste as "Hindu Thakur", which is a distinct entry from "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe and carries great probative value. It is submitted that the petitioner himself admitted during the hearing that he does not have any other revenue or school documents to corroborate the pre-constitutional entry. It is submitted that the pre-constitutional document mentions a male child born to Pundlik Thakur, however, no relationship between the petitioner and Pundlik Thakur has been established on record.
13. It is submitted that the "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe resides in the villages and talukas of Thane, Kulaba, Nashik (Nashik Taluka only), Pune and Ahmadnagar Districts, and the ordinary residence of the petitioner in District Akola and Buldhana does not J-wp4610.23 final.odt 7/12 fall within the said habitat area. It is submitted that the burden of proving the tribe claim rests squarely on the petitioner under Section 8 of Maharashtra Act No.23 of 2001 and the petitioner has failed to discharge the same. It is submitted that the impugned order is just, proper, and legal and does not warrant interference in writ jurisdiction.
14. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner was appointed in the Scheduled Tribe category in a temporary capacity with effect from 05.10.1984, and his service was restored by this Court vide order dated 18.12.2018 in Writ Petition No.5331/2018, subject to the express condition that in case the caste claim is invalidated, his service shall stand dismissed. It is submitted that since the Scrutiny Committee vide impugned order dated 15.09.2021 has invalidated the petitioner's caste claim and cancelled and confiscated the Scheduled Tribe certificate, the appointment of the petitioner has become illegal ab-initio.
15. It is is submitted that in view of the direction contained in Para 13(VI) of the order dated 18.12.2018, respondent No. 2 was well within its jurisdiction to withhold pension and retiral benefits. It is submitted that since the very appointment of the petitioner is illegal and non est in the eyes of law, no statutory entitlement for J-wp4610.23 final.odt 8/12 pension and other monetary benefits can arise, as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Bihar Vs. Devendra Sharma (2019 INSC 1157), Rita Mishra v. Director, Primary Education, Bihar [AIR 1988 Pat 26: 1988 Lab IC 907: 1987 BBCJ 701 (FB)]. It is submitted that the GPF and CGEGIS amounts have already been released to the petitioner after retirement. It is further submitted that the petition has been filed nearly two years after the date of cause of action, without any application for condonation of delay, and is, therefore, liable to be dismissed in limine.
16. We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the documents on record. The petitioner claims to belong to "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe at Sr. No.44 of the Presidential Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950. By virtue of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jaywant Dilip Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976, which came into force on 20.09.1976, area restrictions stand removed, making "Thakur" a Scheduled Tribe for the entire State of Maharashtra. The Committee's reliance on area restriction is, therefore, wholly untenable and is rejected outright.
17. The petitioner has submitted pre-constitutional J-wp4610.23 final.odt 9/12 documentary evidence in the form of the Kotwal Book extract of 1947 and the Sale Deed extract of 01.12.1947, both of which consistently record the caste as "Thakur". It is further significant to note that the Vigilance Cell Report itself confirms that in all documents submitted by the petitioner, the caste entry of "Thakur" is clearly mentioned. As held in Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development, (1994) 6 SCC 241 and Anand Vs. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, (2012) 1 SCC 113, pre-constitutional documents carry the highest probative value and must be accorded due consideration. The Committee erred in discarding the said documents without any cogent or valid reason.
18. As regards the contention that the entry "Thakur" does not establish Scheduled Tribe status, this Court in Nikhil Anil Thakur Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2021(5) Mh.L.J. 104 has categorically held that it is unfathomable to believe that prior to the Scheduled Tribes Order of 1950, any entries would have been recorded as "Thakur Scheduled Tribe". The persons claiming to belong to Thakur Scheduled Tribe did not foresee that their caste would be recognized as Scheduled Tribe and, therefore, never recorded their caste as "Thakur, Scheduled Tribe". The finding of J-wp4610.23 final.odt 10/12 the Committee that the entry "Thakur" in the pre-constitutional document does not prove membership of the Scheduled Tribe is, therefore, legally unsustainable.
19. As regards the affinity test, the Scrutiny Committee, Amravati admittedly has no expert, anthropological or ethnological research material, and no characteristics of the "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe available on record, as is evident from its own RTI reply dated 01.07.2005. In the absence of such infrastructure, the application of the affinity test is directly contrary to the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madhuri Patil's case and the Full Bench of this Court in Shilpa Thakur Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2009(3) Mh.L.J. 995. Rejection of the tribe claim on the ground of failure of the affinity test, conducted without the requisite expertise and infrastructure, is manifestly perverse and cannot be sustained in law. Further the Vigilance Cell report supports the case of the petitioner.
20. As regards the contention of respondent No.2 that the appointment has become illegal ab-initio, it is to be noted that the very foundation of the said contention the impugned invalidation order is being quashed by this Court. Once the invalidation order is set aside, the condition imposed by the order dated 18.12.2018 J-wp4610.23 final.odt 11/12 does not operate against the petitioner, and the withholding of pension and retiral benefits by respondent No.2 is consequently unsustainable. The petitioner having served for over three decades and having retired from service, the continued withholding of retiral dues causes grave and irreparable prejudice to an aged retired employee.
21. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the impugned invalidation order dated 15.09.2021 is unsustainable in law and is liable to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, we pass the following order :
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned invalidation order dated 15.09.2021 passed by Respondent No. 1 Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati in Case No. 5/501/Ser/102018/114946 is hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) The respondent No. 1 is directed to issue the Caste Validity Certificate in favour of the petitioner certifying him as belonging to "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(iv) The respondent No.2 Deputy Director General of J-wp4610.23 final.odt 12/12 Meteorology, Regional Meteorological Centre, Nagpur is directed to release all pension and retiral benefits to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner in relation to his service benefits on the basis of the invalidation order, which stands quashed.
(v) Writ Petition is disposed of.
(vii) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.
(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) wadode Signed by: Mr. Devendra Wadode Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 07/05/2026 13:01:42