Viraj S/O Arun Deshmukh vs Sant Gadgebaba, Amravati ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 6571 Bom

                                 1                         wp5632.15.odt




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                               NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR



                         WRIT PETITION NO.5632 OF 2015



  Viraj s/o. Arun Deshmukh,
  Aged 21 years, Occ. Student,
  r/o. Vijay Colony, Rukhmini
  Nagar, Amravati, Tq. and
  Distt. Amravati.                                ..........      PETITIONER



          // VERSUS //


  1. Sant Gadge Baba Amravati
      University, Amravati through
      its Registrar, Camp, Tq. and 
      Distt. Amravati.
  2. Divisional Caste Certificate 
      Scrutiny Committee No.1,
      through Secretary, Amravati
      Division, Amravati.
  3. Sipna Shikshan Prasarak Mandal
      College of Engineering and 
      Technology, Amravati.                         ..........       RESPONDENTS



::: Uploaded on - 04/09/2017                     ::: Downloaded on - 05/09/2017 01:09:09 :::
                                      2                            wp5632.15.odt

  ____________________________________________________________  
                                 None for the petitioner.
                Mr.J.B.Kasat, Advocate for the Respondent No.1.
                   Mr.S.S.Doifode, A.G.P. for the Respondent No.2.
  ____________________________________________________________


                                    CORAM     :  SMT. VASANTI  A  NAIK
                                                       AND
                                                       M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.

DATED : 28th August, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Smt. Vasanti A Naik, J) :

1. By this Writ Petition, the petitioner challenges the Order

of the Caste Scrutiny Committee, dt.15.5.2015 invalidating the claim

of the petitioner of belonging to 'Kunbi' Other Backward Class.

2. The petitioner was admitted in the Polytechnic College at

Badnera and his caste claim was referred by the said College to the

Scrutiny Committee for verification. The petitioner tendered a

number of documents before the Scrutiny Committee in support of

his caste claim. The Scrutiny Committee, however, rejected the caste

claim of the petitioner by the impugned order dt.15.5.2015.

3 wp5632.15.odt

3. We have perused the Writ Petition, the impugned order

as also the documents annexed to the Writ Petition and the affidavit-

in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent no.2. On a reading of the

impugned order, we find that the Scrutiny Committee has

erroneously rejected the caste claim of the petitioner by observing

that the petitioner did not prove that Bapurao Deshmukh, whose

Kotwal Book entry was produced before the Scrutiny Committee was

his great grand father. It appears from the family tree tendered by

the petitioner that Mukundrao Bapurao Deshmukh was his grand

father and Bapurao Deshmukh was his great grand father. The

Kotwal Book entry is a very old document dt.25.3.1928. This

document surely has more probative value than the other documents

tendered by the petitioner before the Scrutiny Committee. Only

because in the school record of the petitioner 'Kunbi' was recorded in

the caste column, the Scrutiny Committee could not have rejected

the caste claim of the petitioner. We have perused the document

dt.25.3.1928. The said document pertains to Talvel, where the great

grand father of the petitioner was residing. All the other documents

produced by the petitioner before the Scrutiny Committee also show

that the grand father and the great grand father of the petitioner

were residents of Talvel. The tax receipts issued in the name of the

4 wp5632.15.odt

grand father of the petitioner show that tax has been levied on the

house of the grand father of the petitioner at Talvel. Several other

documents including the assessment list etc. show that the grand

father of the petitioner was a resident of Talvel. If that is so, the

Scrutiny Committee could not have rejected the caste claim of the

petitioner by observing that the petitioner had not proved his

relationship with Bapurao as the villagers from Talvel had informed

the Vigilance Cell that they were not aware that the family of the

petitioner resided at Talvel. Merely because some villagers could not

make statements in regard to the residence of the family members of

the petitioner at Talvel, the Scrutiny Committee could not have held

that Bapurao was not the great grand father of the petitioner. We

find on the basis of several documents on record that the petitioner's

forefathers resided at Talvel and the grand father and the great grant

father of the petitioner were also the residents of Talvel. Since the

old entry of the year 1928 has more probative value than the recent

entries pertaining to the father of the petitioner and the petitioner

himself, the Scrutiny Committee ought to have given more weightage

to the old entry of the year 1928. In the circumstances of the case,

we are inclined to allow the Writ Petition by quashing and setting

aside the impugned order dt.15.5.2015.

5 wp5632.15.odt

4. Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the Writ Petition is

allowed. The impugned order dt.15.5.2015 is quashed and set aside.

It is hereby held that the petitioner belongs to 'Kunbi' caste, which is

included in the Other Backward Classes. The Scrutiny Committee is

directed to issue the Caste Validity Certificate in favour of the

petitioner within three months.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no

order as to costs.

                               JUDGE                                   JUDGE
   



  [jaiswal]





                                6             wp5632.15.odt