Bombay High Court
Sudhakar Rajaram Tumram Amt vs The Committee For Scrutiny And ... on 21 July, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
wp.2647.04
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 2647/2004
* Sudhakar s/o Rajaram Tumram
Aged 34 years, occu: service as
Junior Assistant R/o Ittamgaon
Tq. Warud, Dist.Amravati. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1) The Committee for Scrutiny and
Verification of Tribe Claims
Amravati.
2) The Block Development Officer
Panchayat Samiti, Morshi
Dist.Amravati. ..RESPONDENTS
.
...................................................................................................................
None present for petitioner
Mr. N.S.Rao, Assistant Govt. Pleader for respondent no.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE &
MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 21 st
July, 2017
JUDGMENT: (Per Mrs. Swapna Joshi, J.)
1. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the decision of
respondent no.1-Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims,
Amravati, rendered on 31.05.2004, by which the caste certificate of the
petitioner as belonging to 'Arakh' Scheduled Tribe, issued by the
::: Uploaded on - 01/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 08/08/2017 00:47:09 :::
wp.2647.04
2
competent authority on 21.12.1988 has been invalidated.
2. The petitioner is a project affected person. He was
appointed as Junior Assistant in Zill Parishad, Amravati and is working in
Panchayat Samiti at Morshi. The petitioner claims that he belongs to
'Arakh' community, which has been notified as a Scheduled Tribe at Sr.
No.18 in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order,1950 in relation to
the State of Maharashtra. The caste claim of the petitioner was referred
to the Scrutiny Committee for the purpose of verification. The petitioner
submitted in support of his tribe claim, seven documents before the said
Committee. However, the said Committee without considering those
documents, passed the order invalidating the tribe claim of the petitioner
mainly on the ground that the petitioner has failed to establish socio-
cultural affinity and ethnic linkage with 'Arakh' sub-tribe of 'Gond',
Scheduled Tribe. The Committee observed, " 'Arakh' Scheduled Tribe has
not been listed as an independent single entry, but it has been clubbed
along with numerous of the synonyms and sub-tribes included in the
Gond, Scheduled Tribe, listed at Sr. No.18. The Committee relied upon
the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dadaji @ Dina
vs. Sukhdeo Babu & others, reported in 1980 S.C.R.150, wherein it has
::: Uploaded on - 01/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 08/08/2017 00:47:09 :::
wp.2647.04
3
been held that "only the 'Mana' community having affiliation with the
'Gond' Scheduled Tribe will fall within the scope of the entry". It is
observed in the impugned order passed by the said Committee that the
applicant could not bring out the distinct socio-cultural traits, customs
and traditions prevalent in 'Arakh' sub-tribe of 'Gond' Scheduled Tribe.
Whatever information has been furnished by the applicant drifts away
from that with regard to the traits and characteristics of 'Arakh' sub-tribe
of 'Gond' Scheduled Tribe community. Thus, the Scrutiny Committee
rejected the tribe claim of the petitioner.
3. Significantly, the controversy involved in this petition is no
more res integra, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of State of Maharashtra and others vs. Mana Adim Jamat
Mandal, reported in 2006 (4) SCC 98. The Hon'ble Apex Court has
held that the judgments one in the case of Dina vs. Narayansingh,
reported in (1968) 38 ELR 212 and, another, in the case of Dadaji @
Dina vs. Sukhdeo Babu, reported in (1980) 1 SCC 621 stand impliedly
overruled by the decision of Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Apex
Court, in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Milind, reported in
2001(1) SCC 4. The Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Maharashtra vs.
::: Uploaded on - 01/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 08/08/2017 00:47:09 :::
wp.2647.04
4
Mana Adim Jamat Mandal (supra) held that each of the tribes specified
in entry No.18 must be deemed to be a separate tribe and not sub-tribe
of 'Gond'.
4. Applying the principle laid down as above in Mana Adim
Jamat Mandal's case, we hold that tribe "Arakh" in Entry No.18 of the
Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 in relation to the State of
Maharashtra is an independent and separate tribe and not a sub-tribe
of 'Gond' and the petitioner was not required to establish his affinity with
'Gond' Scheduled Tribe. Thus, the observations of the Committee that the
petitioner has failed to establish his affinity with 'Gond' cannot be
sustained and the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee is liable to be
quashed and set aside. The Scrutiny Committee has to examine the case
of the petitioner for 'Arakh' Scheduled Tribe category, which is not a sub-
tribe of 'Gond'.
5. In view of the aforesaid fact-situation, the following order is
passed:-
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petition is partly allowed.
(ii) The order dated 31.05.2004 passed by the respondent no.
wp.2647.04
1-Committee is hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) The matter is remanded back to the Respondent no.1-
Committee for a fresh consideration, in accordance with law,
taking into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court
and the observations made by this Court.
(iv) The Respondent no.1-Committee to issue notice to the
petitioner to secure his presence, within one month and thereafter
proceed to decide the claim in accordance with law.
(v) Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
sahare
