Bombay High Court
Nitesh S/O Krushnarao Chudre vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 15 November, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1
wp6874.13.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.6874 of 2013
Nitesh s/o Krushnarao Chudre,
Aged about 28 years,
Occupation - Service,
R/o Saptashrungi Society,
Ganesh Nagar, Akola. ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Department of Tribal Development,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Public Works Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
3. The Superintendent Engineer,
Public Works Department,
Amravati Division,
Amravati-03.
4. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee,
Amravati Division, Amravati,
through its Member Secretary. ... Respondents
::: Uploaded on - 20/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2017 01:13:18 :::
2
wp6874.13.odt
Shri R.J. Mirza, Advocate for Petitioner.
Shri D.P. Thakre, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents.
Coram : R.K. Deshpande & M.G. Giratkar, JJ.
Date : 15th November, 2017
Oral Judgment (Per R.K. Deshpande, J.) :
1. The challenge in this petition is to the order
dated 21-11-2013 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Amravati Division, Amravati, invalidating
the claim of the petitioner for 'Mana', Scheduled Tribe Category,
which is an entry at Serial No.18 in the Constitution (Scheduled
Tribes) Order, 1950 and cancelling and confiscating the caste
certificate dated 15-7-2006 issued by the Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Kelapur, District Yavatmal, in the name of the
petitioner.
2. Before the Committee, the petitioner produced about
twenty documents in support of his claim for 'Mana', Scheduled
Tribe Category. Out of those documents, we find about twelve
documents as relevant, containing the entry 'Mana'. Of these
wp6874.13.odt
twelve documents, three documents at
Serial Nos.8, 9 and 10 contain the entry 'Mana' made in the birth
register extract in respect of the petitioner's paternal
grandmother on 16-9-1913, the extract of birth register in
respect of paternal grandfather issued on 27-1-1916, and the
extract of birth register in respect of paternal grandfather on
22-4-1929. The other documents though indicate the caste
'Mana' pertain to the period subsequent to 1950. All these
documents indicate the caste of the petitioner and his blood
relatives as 'Mana'.
3. The Committee accepts these documents, but rejects the
same on the ground that 'Mana' is also an entry in the list of
Other Backward Class category or Special Backward Class
category. The Committee holds that the entry 'Mana' shows
similarity with 'Kunbis' and 'Malis', and taking the benefit of
similarity in nomenclature, the claim for 'Mana', Scheduled
Tribe, has been made. The Committee relies upon the decision
of the Apex Court in the case of Dadaji v. Sukhdev Babu, reported
wp6874.13.odt
in (1980) 1 SCC 612.
4. It is not possible for us to sustain the findings recorded
in the order of the Scrutiny Committee. In the decision of the
Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra & Ors. v. Mana
Adim Jamat Mandal, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 98, it is held that
'Mana' is a separate Scheduled Tribe by itself, included in Entry
No.18 of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Orders, 1950, and
it is not a sub-tribe of 'Gond'. In the said decision itself, the
earlier decision in Dadaji's case, cited supra, is held to be
impliedly overruled by the decision of the Constitution Bench of
the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Milind and
others, reported in 2001(1) Mh.L.J. 1. In view of this, the
Committee was in error in holding that there are 'Manas' in open
category as well as in Scheduled Tribe category in State of
Maharashtra, and since 'Manas' are included in the list of Other
Backward Class category at Serial No.268, the claim of the
petitioner cannot be validated.
wp6874.13.odt
5. In the decision of this Court, which we have delivered in
Writ Petition No.3308 of 2013 [Gajanan s/o Pandurang Shende v.
The Head-Master, Govt. Ashram School, Dongargaon Salod, Tah.
Sindewahi, Distt. Chandrapur, and others] on 8-11-2017, we have
dealt with the said matter in detail and we, therefore, need not
record the separate reasons in this judgment to hold that once
'Manas' throughout the State of Maharashtra are entitled to be
treated as Scheduled Tribe by reason of the Scheduled Tribes
Order, as it now stands, it is not open to the State Government to
say otherwise, viz. that it is either in the list of Other Backward
Class catetory or in the list of Special Backward Class category.
6. The petitioner has produced on record the documents of
pre-Independence period showing the caste as 'Mana', and in the
absence of there being any doubt or any document produced on
record showing the caste of the petitioner other than 'Mana', the
Committee was in error in applying the affinity test, 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
wp6874.13.odt
in (2012) 1 SCC 113.
7. In the result, this petition is allowed. The order
dated 21-11-2013 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Amravati Division, Amravati, is hereby
quashed and set aside. It is held that the caste certificate
dated 15-7-2006 produced by the petitioner and issued by the
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kelapur, District Yavatmal, is valid
and declared that the petitioner belongs to 'Mana', Scheduled
Tribe, which is an entry at Serial No.18 in the Constitution
(Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. The Committee is directed to
issue a caste validity certificate in the name of the petitioner
accordingly, within a period of one month from the date of
producing the copy of this judgment by the petitioner before it.
8. Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to
costs.
(M.G. Giratkar, J.) (R.K. Deshpande, J.)
Lanjewar, PS
