Bombay High Court
Ku. Suvarna D/O Bhaurao Gaikwad vs The Scheduled Tribe Caste ... on 22 November, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 wp5043.13.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.5043 OF 2013
Ku. Suvarna d/o. Bhaurao Gaikwad,
Aged about 25 years, Occ. Service,
r/o. Tq. Babulgaon, District
Yavatmal. .......... PETITIONER
// VERSUS //
1. The Scheduled Tribe Caste
Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Irvin Chowk, Amravati.
2. The Secretary,
Lalitabai Education Society at
Pulgaon, Distt. Wardha.
3. The Head Mistress,
Lalitabai Murarka High School,
Pulgaon, Distt. Wardha.
::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/11/2017 00:57:25 :::
2 wp5043.13.odt
4. The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Wardha. .......... RESPONDENTS
____________________________________________________________
Ms Preeti Rane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mrs.M.H.Deshmukh, A.G.P. for Respondent No.4.
____________________________________________________________
CORAM : R.K.DESHPANDE
AND
M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATED : 22nd November, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per R.K.Deshpande, J) :
1. The claim of petitioner for 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe
category, which is an entry at Serial No.18 in the Constitution
(Scheduled Tribe) Order, 1950 has been invalidated by the
Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati and
the Caste Certificate dt.27.6.2005 issued by the Sub-Divisional
Officer, Yavatmal showing the caste of the petitioner as 'Mana'
Scheduled Tribe has been invalidated by an order dt.29.5.2013,
which is the subject matter of challenge in this petition.
3 wp5043.13.odt
2. Before the Committee, the petitioner produced six
documents showing the caste of the petitioner and his blood relatives
as 'Mana'. The oldest document is dated 15.5.1945, recording caste
as 'Mana' in the name of Shankar Mahadeo, the cousin grand father
of the petitioner. The Committee holds that the Police Vigilance Cell
inquiry discovers that the caste of the petitioner's paternal aunt and
grand father has been recorded as 'Mani' in the Death extract in the
years 1958 and 1960 respectively, which is not entry in the list of
Scheduled Tribes. The Committee, therefore, applies affinity test and
rejected the claim of petitioner for 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe.
3. It is not in dispute that the oldest entry is dated
15.5.1945 in the name of Shankar Maroti, the grand father of the
petitioner showing the caste as 'Mana'. It is the pre-constitutional
document. Police Vigilance Cell took out two entries : one in the
name of Chandrabhaga Shamrao on 10-9-1958 and Shankar
Mahadeo in May, 1960, indicating their caste as 'Mani' in the Birth
and Death register. The petitioner has denied to have any relations
with these two persons. The finding of the Committee that these
entries pertain to paternal aunt and grand father of the petitioner is
4 wp5043.13.odt
not at all based upon any evidence. Neither the Police Vigilance Cell
report indicates any such inquiry nor the order. We, therefore,
cannot sustain the finding of the Committee about relationship of the
petitioner with the aforesaid two persons. There is nothing on record
to show that the caste of the petitioner or any of his blood relations
is recorded other than 'Mana'.
4. The Committee rejected the documents by applying
affinity test. The findings of the Committee are two fold -
(a) that the documents produced, though having a probative
value, indicate caste as 'Mana' and not as Mana Scheduled Tribe,
and,
(b) that entry 'Mani' in the years 1958 and 1960 shows caste
other than 'Mana'.
5. In our decision in Writ Petition No.3308 of 2013,
Gajanan s/o. Pandurang Shende .vs. The Head Master,
Government Ashram School, Dongargaon Salod, dt.8.11.2017, we
have held in paragraph no.15 of the said decision that the Committee
was clearly in error in holding that 'Mana' community was included
5 wp5043.13.odt
in the list of Other Backward Classes and later on, in the list of
Special Backward Classes, and though the petitioner has established
that he belongs to 'Mana' community, it is not established that he
belongs to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe. For this purpose, we have relied
upon the decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mana
Adim Jamat Mandal .vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in
2003 (3) Mh.L.J. 513, which is confirmed by the Apex Court in the
case of State of Maharashtra and Others .vs. Mana Adim Jamat
Mandal reported in (2006) 4 SCC 98.
6. In para no.19 of the decision in the case of Gajanan
s/o.Pandurang Shende (cited supra), we have taken a view that the
concept of recognized Scheduled Tribe for the purposes of giving
benefits and concessions was not prevailing prior to 1950 and,
therefore, only caste or community to which a person belonged was
stated in the birth, school and revenue records maintained. We have
held that the documents were issued in the printed format, which
contains a column under the heading 'Caste' and there is no column
of tribe. Irrespective of the fact that it is a tribe, the name of tribe is
shown in column of caste. While entering the name the distinction
between caste and tribe is ignored. It is held that the entire 'Mana'
6 wp5043.13.odt
community all over the State, which is conferred a status of a
recognized Scheduled Tribe in the State and no evidence can be led
to exclude certain communities of 'Mana' from granting protection or
benefits of Scheduled Tribe.
7. Relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case
of E.V.Chinnaiah .vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others
reported in 2004 (9) Scale 316, we have held in paragraph 18 of the
decision in Gajanan s/o. Pandurang Shende's case (cited supra) as
under :-
"18. Applying the law laid down in E.V. Chinnaiah's case, it
has to be held in the facts of the present that once it is clear that
'Mana' community is included in entry No.18 of the Constitution
(Scheduled Tribes) Order, it has to be read as it is, representing a
class of 'Mana' as a whole and it is not permissible either for the
Executive or for the Scrutiny Committee to artificially
sub-divide or sub-classify 'Mana' community as one
having different groups, like 'Badwaik Mana', 'Khand Mana',
'Kshatriya Mana', 'Kunbi Mana', 'Maratha Mana', 'Gond Mana',
'Mani/Mane', etc., for the purposes of grant of benefits
7 wp5043.13.odt
available to a recognized Scheduled Tribe. To exclude such
persons from the entry 'Mana', to be recognized as Scheduled
Tribe, amounts to interference, rearrangement, re-grouping
or re-classifying the caste 'Mana', found in the
Presidential Order and would be violative not only of
Article 342, but also of Article 14 of the Constitution of
India. The classification of entry 'Mana" in different
categories, like 'Badwaik Mana', 'Khand Mana', 'Kshatriya
Mana', 'Kunbi Mana', 'Maratha Mana', 'Gond Mana',
'Mani'/'Mane', etc., for the purpose of conferring a status as a
recognized Scheduled Tribe is artificial and without any
authority. The Committee has, therefore, committed an error in
rejecting the claim by holding that the documents
produced simply indicate the caste 'Mana' and not 'Mana,
Scheduled Tribe'.
8. It is not the case that 'Mani'/'Mane' is an independent
caste or a tribe, which exists in the State of Maharashtra. It is also
not the caste included in the list of Other Backward Classes or
Special Backward Classes published in relation to the State of
Maharashtra. Therefore, even assuming that two entries of 'Mani' are
8 wp5043.13.odt
of the blood relatives of the petitioner, those are subsequent to
15.5.1945 - the entry of 'Mana' and the petitioner cannot be denied
the claim on the basis of these two entries.
9. In the decision of this Court in the case of Gajanan s/o.
Pandurang Shende (cited supra), we have also taken a view relying
upon the decision of Apex Court in Anand v. Committee for
Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and others ,
reported in (2012) 1 SCC 113, that where the documents produced on
record do not raise any doubt, the Committee cannot reject the same by
applying affinity test, which is required to be invoked as a corroborative
piece of evidence.
10. In view of above, the order passed by the Scrutiny
Committee impugned in this petition cannot, therefore, be sustained.
It will have to be quashed and set aside and the petition will have to
be allowed. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed and the order
is passed as under :
9 wp5043.13.odt
(a) The order dt.29.5.2013 passed by the
Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Amravati/respondent no.1 is hereby quashed and set aside.
(b) It is declared that the Certificate dt.27.6.2005
produced by the petitioner and issued by the Sub-Divisional
Officer, Yavatmal is held to be valid and it is further
declared that the petitioner has established her claim for
'Mana' Scheduled Tribe category, which is an entry at Serial
No.18 in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950.
(c) The Committee is directed to issue Caste
Validity Certificate to the petitioner within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
11. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to
costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
[jaiswal]
10 wp5043.13.odt
