Gaurav Dilip Tikas vs State Of Mah.Thr.Secty And 3 Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 3768 Bom

                                1
                                                          wp2725.02.odt

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

                   Writ Petition No.2725 of 2002


  Gaurav s/o Dilip Tikas,
  Aged about 18 years,
  Occupation - Student,
  R/o. 7/31, NIT Colony,
  Atre Layout, Pratap Nagar,
  Nagpur.                                          ... Petitioner

       Versus

  1. The State of Maharashtra,
     through its Secretary,
     Tribal Development Committee,
     Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

  2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
     Scrutiny Committee,
     Adiwasi Vikas Bhawan,
     Giripeth,
     Nagpur.

  3. Director, Medical Education & Research,
     Maharashtra State, Mumbai.

  4. Director, Technical Education,
     Maharashtra State, Mumbai.                    ... Respondents


  None for Petitioner.
  Shri   V.P.   Maldhure,   Assistant   Government   Pleader   for 
  Respondent Nos.1 and 2.




::: Uploaded on - 30/06/2017                  ::: Downloaded on - 01/07/2017 01:08:20 :::
                                      2
                                                                    wp2725.02.odt

                Coram : R.K. Deshpande & Mrs. Swapna Joshi, JJ.

th Dated : 29 June, 2017

Oral Judgment (Per R.K. Deshpande, J.) :

1. The challenge in this petition is to the order

dated 30-4-2002 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate

Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur, invalidating the caste claim of the

petitioner as belonging to 'Halba' (Scheduled Tribe).

2. We have gone through the impugned order passed by

the Scrutiny Committee, which relies upon the documents

pertaining to the period 1930, 1936, 1937 and 1949, i.e. Prior to

issuance of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribe) Order, 1950 in

the name of the maternal uncle of the petitioner's father. The

Committee does not record its finding on the documents at serial

Nos.7 and 8, which are in the name of the father of the

petitioner, issued in the year 1961 and 1965, showing the caste

of the petitioner's father as Halba. Though the document at

serial No.6, i.e. the birth certificate of the petitioner's father

issued on 28-9-1956, has been considered, the finding is that the

wp2725.02.odt

possibility of reservation cannot be denied in view of this

document, applying the socio-cultural traits, ethnic linkage,

affinity test and police vigilance cell report, the claim is rejected.

3. In our view, in terms of the definition of 'relative' under

Rule 2(f) of the Maharashtra Scheduled Tribes (Regulation of

Issuance and Verification of) Certificate Rules, 2003, 'relative'

means a blood relative from paternal side. The Committee has,

therefore, committed an error in relying upon the documents

from the maternal side of the petitioner's father. So far as the

question of applying the affinity test is concerned, in view of the

decision of the Apex Court in the case of Anand v. Committee for

Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and others, reported in

2011(6) Mh.L.J. 919, the affinity test depends upon the facts and

circumstances of each case and no strait-jacket formula can be

adopted. In view of this position, the impugned order passed by

the Committee cannot be sustained.

4. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order

wp2725.02.odt

passed by the Scrutiny Committee on 30-4-2002, is hereby

quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the

Committee for decision afresh after giving the petitioner an

opportunity of being heard and after following the procedure

prescribed by the law.

5. Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to

costs.

                             JUDGE.                                   JUDGE.

   Lanjewar