Kishore S/O Laxman Dodke vs Committee For Scrutiny & ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 4966 Bom

     WP 1748.2000 [J].odt                          1




                                                                               
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                       
                                   NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                              WRIT PETITION NO.1748 OF 2000




                                                      
     Kishor s/o Laxman Dodke,
     Aged about 27 years,
     Occupation - Service,




                                              
     R/o. Mangalzanak, Tah. Risod,
     District - Washim.       ig                        ..             Petitioner

                                    .. Versus ..
                            
     1] Committee for Scrutiny And
        Verification of Tribes Claims,
        Through its Chairman,
        Adiwasi Vikas Bhawan,
      


        Giripeth, Nagpur.
   



     2] Maharashtra State Electricity Board,
        Through its Superintending Engineer,
        M.S.E.B. Vidyut Bhawan,
        II nd Floor, Ratanlal Plot,





        Akola.

     3] Sub-Engineer,
        Maharashtra Electricity Board,
        Tah. Risod, District - Washim.                  ..             Respondents





                           ..........
     Shri P.T. Dhok, Advocate for the petitioner,
     Shri A.M. Joshi, Advocate for respondent no.1,
     Mrs. U.A. Patil, Advocate for respondent nos.2 and 3.
                           ..........

                                    CORAM :  B.R. GAVAI  AND
                                             V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED : AUGUST 25, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : B.R. GAVAI, J.)

1] The petitioner has approached this court being aggrieved by

the order passed by the respondent-Scrutiny Committee dated 31.3.2000

thereby invalidating the claim of the petitioner of belonging to 'Mana'

Scheduled Tribe.

2] Heard Shri P.T. Dhok, the learned counsel for the petitioner,

Shri A.M. Joshi, the learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Mrs. U.A.

Patil, the learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3.

3] The petitioner was appointed as Junior Machine Operator in

the employment of Respondent no.2 against the post reserved for the

Scheduled Tribe. Since the petitioner was appointed against the post

reserved for Scheduled Tribe category, his claim came to be referred to

the Scrutiny Committee for verification. The claim is rejected on the

ground that the petitioner has failed to establish that he has an affinity

with 'Gond' Scheduled Tribe and, therefore, his claim was not

entertained by the Scrutiny Committee.

4] The 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, held that 'Mana' was not a sub-tribe of 'Gond' and was a

separate tribe by itself. It has further held that in view of the judgment

of the Apex Court in the case of Palghat Jilla Thandan Samudhaya

Samrakshna Samiti and another .vs. State of Kerala and another,

reported in (1994) 1 SCC 359, the entry has to be read as it is. The said

judgment was challenged by the State of Maharashtra before the Apex

Court. The Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra and others

.vs. Mana Adim Jamat Mandal, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 98, upheld the

findings of the High Court and held that if a candidate satisfies that he

belongs to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe, he is entitled to be treated as a

member belonging to Scheduled Tribe.

5] The Apex Court in the case of Anand Katole .vs. Committee

for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribal Claims, reported in 2011 (6)

Mh.L.J. (SC) 919, has also held that the pre-constitutional documents

will have to be given more weightage. The petitioner has placed on

record the documents pertaining to the year 1944, which is with regard

to the birth of the petitioner's father Laxman. It shows that Laxman

Tulshiram Dodke was born to Tulshiram Ramji Dodke on 2.9.1944.

Apart from that, even the report of the vigilance cell is in favour of the

petitioner.

6] We, therefore, find that taking into consideration the pre-

constitutional documents and the report of the vigilance cell, the

Scrutiny Committee has erroneously rejected the claim of the petitioner.

In any case, the reasoning given by the learned Committee that only

such of the Manas, who have affinity with 'Gond', are entitled to be

treated as Scheduled Tribe, is not correct, in view of the law laid down

by the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra and others .vs.

Mana Adim Jamat Mandal (cited supra).

7] In the result, the petition is allowed. The impugned order

dated 31.3.2000 is quashed and set aside. It is held that the petitioner

belongs to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe. The respondent-Scrutiny Committee

is directed to issue validity certificate to the petitioner, within a period of

four weeks from today.

                              JUDGE                                           JUDGE
   



     Gulande












                                                                                   
                                   C E R T I F I C A T E

"I certify that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of

original signed Judgment/Order."

Uploaded by : A.S. Gulande, P.A. Uploaded on : 29.8.2016.