Bombay High Court
Ku.Anju D/O.Ishwardas Batul vs State Of Mah.Thru Sec.Tribal ... on 28 April, 2016
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
1 wp1028-05
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
Writ Petition No.1028 of 2005
Ku. Anju d/o Ishwardas Batul,
aged about 28 years, Occu. Teacher,
(Shikshan Sevak), R/o Indira Gandhi
Nagar, University Road, Amravati,
Tq.and Distt. Amravati. ... ... Petitioner.
-Versus -
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Tribal Welfare Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 32.
2. Committee for Scrutiny and
Verification of Tribe Claims,
Amravati Division, Amravati,
through its Dy. Director ( R) and
Member Secretary.
3. Secretary,
Shivaji Education Society,
Shivaji Nagar, Amravati.
4. Principal,
Shivaji D.Ed. College, Chikhli,
Tq. Chikhli, Dist. Buldhana. ... ... Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. G.G. Mishra, counsel for petitioner.
Ms. P.D. Rane, AGP for respondent nos. 1& 2.
Mr. Abhay Sambre, counsel for respondent nos.3 & 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : 28th April, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT ( Per B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.)
Heard advocate G.G. Mishra for petitioner, advocate Sambre for
2 wp1028-05
respondent nos.3 and 4 and Ms. Rane, learned AGP for respondent nos.1 & 2.
2. Shri Mishra at the threshold sought adjournment by submitting
that his client has engaged a senior advocate. However, we have rejected
that request.
3. Shri Mishra thereafter has submitted that several old documents
have been relied upon by petitioner in which caste has been recorded as
"Mannewar". However, impact of all those documents have not be evaluated
though documents are not found to be either tampered with or interpolated,
only because in documents of some relatives, their caste has been recorded as
"Telgu Mannewar" or "Telgu", the documents submitted by petitioner have
been ignored.
4. Entry relating to caste "Mannewar" could not have been construed
by reading it with "Gond" only because both tribes find mention at Serial No.
18 in Constitution Scheduled Tribes Order 1949. He relies upon judgment
of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of State of Maharashtra and Others Vs. Mana
Adim Jamat Mandal reported in (2006) 4 SCC 98 to urge that such view
taken earlier by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Dina @ Dadaji Vs.
Sukhdeobabu (1980) 1 SCC 621 has been reversed by Hon'ble Apex Court
itself.
5. He further contends that affinity test had also been applied with
3 wp1028-05
prejudice that is petitioner has to show similarity of traits & customs with
'Gond' community. Thus affinity test applied is also unsustainable. On the
basis of such affinity test, the caste claim has been invalidated.
6. Learned AGP is supporting the order. She submits that as the
Committee has found tribe 'Gond' and tribe 'Mannewar' placed together at
Sr. No. 18 in Constitution Scheduled Tribe Order 1949, the conclusion
arrived at by the Committee is correct.
7. Petitioner, therefore, must show some affinity or connection with
'Gond' tribe. It is further submitted that as caste as recorded is either 'Telgu'
or 'Telgu Mannewar' in documents of persons who are relatives of petitioner,
reliance upon such documents by Committee cannot be said to be erroneous.
8. We find that this court has while issuing notice in the matter
granted interim relief and therefore petitioner continues in service.
9. Petitioner filed several documents to buttress her submission that
she belongs to 'Mannewar' Scheduled Tribe. Those documents are also
verified by Vigilance Cell Authority and it is clear from the perusal of the
impugned order that the Committee has not found anything wrong with any
of the documents.
10. In paragraph 8 of its order, as caste is recorded either as "Telgu"
or as " Telgu Mannewar", the said documents perhaps are not relied upon.
4 wp1028-05
However, this is the inference which one has to draw, as Committee has
nowhere said it expressly.
11. Division Bench of this Court in a case reported at 2004(4) All MR
639 (Shri Anil Ramdas Mede Vs. Stat e of Maharashtra & Ors.) has held that
Telgu is an official language and not a caste. Thus, mention of 'Telgu' in a
document has been held not to signify caste/tribe. That view has been
upheld by us while deciding W.P.No.4432/2003 on 4.4.2016. In this
situation, merely because documents of relatives show caste either as 'Telgu'
or as 'Telgu Mannewar', documents of petitioner could not have been
ignored.
12. Perusal of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of State of
Maharashtra and Others Vs. Mana Adim Jamat Mandal clearly shows that
effort of Committee to find out similarity in traits and customs followed by
'Gond' community and by 'Mannewar' Community, is erroneous. Similarly,
because both tribes appear under entry at Sr. No. 18, it cannot be presumed
that they eclipse each other.
13. When documents conclusively establish caste as "Mannewar", in
the light of findings given above, affinity test by itself can never be decisive.
Here affinity test has been applied with prejudicial mind that 'Mannewar' and
'Gond' must have some common features and semblance. As this
5 wp1028-05
preconceived notion itself is found to be unsustainable, affinity applying
with such notion cannot be upheld.
14. In this situation, we find impugned order dated 28.12.2004
passed by respondent no. 2 committee unsustainable. It is accordingly
quashed ad set aside. Respondent n.2 Committee I directed to give validity to
petitioner as belonging to "Mannewar" Scheduled Tribe.
Writ petition is thus allowed and disposed of. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Hirekhan
