Mr. Aamir Naim Sayed Raheman S/O ... vs State Of Mah., Through Its ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 3316 Bom

                                                        1                     J-WP-914-15.odt

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                         WRIT PETITION NO. 914 OF 2015

 Mr. Aamir Naim Sayed Raheman
 S/o Sayed Raheman Babasha,
 Aged about : 21 years, 
 Occ. Student, R/o Ahebab Colony,
 Near Water Tank, Walgaon Road,
 Amravati (Mah).                                                  ..... PETITIONER

                                 ...V E R S U S...

 1. State of Maharashtra,
    Through its Secretary,
    Social Justice and Special
    Assistant Department,
    Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

 2. The Divisional Caste Certificate
    Scrutiny Committee No.1,
    Amravati Division, Amravati
    Through its Chairman / Member
    Secretary, B Wing, First Floor,
    Dr. Ambedkar Samajik Nyay Bhavan,
    Camp Road, Amravati - 444606.

 3. The Registrar,
    Sant Gadgebaba Amravati University,
    Amravati.

 4. The Principal,
    Prof. Ram Meghe Institute of 
    Technology & Research, Badnera,
    Amravati - 444701.                                            ... RESPONDENTS

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Shri Shriniwas Deshpande, Advocate for the petitioner.
 Shri I. J. Damle, AGP for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
 Shri N. S. Badhe, Adv. for the respondent No.3.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CORAM:-    
                                             SMT. VASANTI  A  NAIK &
                                                 ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.

DATED :-

19/06/2017.

2 J-WP-914-15.odt

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

By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order

of the Scrutiny Committee, dated 09/12/2014 invalidating the claim of

the petitioner of belonging to "Chhapparband" (Vimukta Jati).

The petitioner claimed to belong to "Chhapparband"

(Vimukta Jatis) and secured admission in the college on a seat that was

earmarked for the Vimukta Jatis. The caste claim of the petitioner was

referred to the Scrutiny Committee for verification. On an appreciation

of the material on record, the Scrutiny Committee invalidated the caste

claim of the petitioner by the order dated 09/12/2014. The petitioner

has challenged the said order in the instant petition.

Shri Deshpande, the learned counsel for the petitioner

submitted that the Scrutiny Committee was not justified in rejecting the

caste claim of the petitioner. It is submitted that the Government

Circular dated 23rd March, 2011 was not considered by the Scrutiny

Committee in the right perspective, while rejecting the caste claim of

the petitioner. It is submitted that word 'Shah' is affixed to the name of

the father and grand-father of the petitioner and the caste of the grant-

father of the petitioner was recorded as Fakir and his name was also

3 J-WP-914-15.odt

mentioned as Rahimshah Anwarshah Fakir. It is submitted that the old

documents of the pre-independence era ought to have been considered

by the Scrutiny Committee for validating the caste claim of the

petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is a Muslim, the word

'Shah' is affixed to the name and surname of the father and the grand-

father of the petitioner and in some of the old documents, the word

Fakir is also found in the name of the blood relatives of the petitioner. It

is stated that the guidelines, as laid down in the Government Circular

dated 23rd March, 2011 were not followed by the Scrutiny Committee

while invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner. It is submitted that

though the Scrutiny Committee has observed in para 8 of the impugned

order that most of the conditions that are laid down in the Government

Circular dated 23rd March, 2011 stand fulfilled in the case of the

petitioner, the Scrutiny Committee has illegally rejected the caste claim

of the petitioner after holding that the petitioner had not produced the

old documents in which the caste of his near relatives was recorded as

"Chhapparband".

Shri Damle, the learned Assistant Government Pleader

appearing for the Scrutiny Committee has supported the order of the

Scrutiny Committee. It is submitted that though the petitioner is a

Muslim and the words 'Fakir' and 'Shah' find place in the names and

surnames of the near relatives of the petitioner, it cannot be said that

4 J-WP-914-15.odt

the petitioner has proved his caste claim as the caste of the blood

relatives of the petitioner is not recorded as "Chhapparband" in the old

documents of the pre-independence era. The learned Assistant

Government Pleader sought for the dismissal of the writ petition.

On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a

perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the Scrutiny Committee

was not justified in rejecting the caste claim of the petitioner merely

because there were no documents that could be produced by the

petitioner before the Scrutiny Committee that the caste of his near

relatives was recorded as "Chhapparband" in the pre-independence era.

The petitioner had tendered all the relevant documents on which he

could have relied on and which he could have possessed, before the

Scrutiny Committee. The Vigilance Cell enquiry was conducted in the

caste claim of the petitioner. The Vigilance Cell did not unearth any

other documents which could falsify the caste claim of the petitioner.

The petitioner had relied on two old documents of the pre-

independence era to prove his caste claim. The Scrutiny Committee

however rejected the document of the year 1944 which pertains to the

cousin grand-father of the petitioner on the ground that the caste of the

grand-father of the petitioner was not recorded as "Chhapparband" in

the said document, but was recorded as Fakir. While holding so, it

appears that the Scrutiny Committee did not give due weightage to the

5 J-WP-914-15.odt

guidelines laid down in the Government Circular dated 23 rd March,

2011. Though the Scrutiny Committee observed that the petitioner is a

Muslim, that the words 'Fakir' and 'Shah' find place in the names of the

father and the grand-father of the petitioner, the Scrutiny Committee

rejected the caste claim of the petitioner by making a reference to

Clause 3 of the Government Circular dated 23 rd March, 2011. Clause 3

of the Government Circular merely recites that the Scrutiny Committee

should decide the caste claim on the basis of the orders and guidelines

laid down by the Government from time to time and the material placed

by the claimant on record. The material placed by the petitioner on

record shows that the caste of the petitioner could be "Chhapparband".

The Scrutiny Committee has recorded the statements of the family

members and near relatives of the petitioner and has opined that the

caste of the petitioner could be "Chhapparband". If that is so, it was

incumbent on the part of the Scrutiny Committee to have given enough

weightage to the report of the Vigilance Cell. The Scrutiny Committee

however did not give any weightage to the report of the Vigilance Cell,

though it mentioned about the same in the impugned order. In the

circumstances of the case, it would be necessary to direct the Scrutiny

Committee to issue a Caste Validity Certificate in favour of the

petitioner that his caste is "Chhapparband".

6 J-WP-914-15.odt

Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is

allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The respondent

- Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue a Caste Validity Certificate that

the petitioner belongs to "Chhapparband" caste, within three months.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no

order as to costs.

                      JUDGE                                       JUDGE


 Choulwar