Bombay High Court
Tukaram S/O. Govindrao Narnawre vs The Scheduled Tribe Caste ... on 23 November, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 jg.w.p.5935.15.odt
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 5935 OF 2015
Tukaram s/o Govindrao Narnawre
Aged about 34 yrs, Occ. Service,
R/o S.R.P. Camp, Quarter No. 27/3,
Amravati. ... Petitioner
VERSUS
The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Irvin Chowk,
Amravati, through its Chairman. ... Respondent
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. P. D. Rane, Advocate for the petitioner
Mrs. M. H. Deshmukh, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE AND
M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATE : 23/11/2017.
Oral Judgment (Per : R. K. Deshpande, J.)
The challenge in this petition is to the order dated
24-4-2009 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner for
'Mana', Scheduled Tribe Category which is at entry no. 18 in the
Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 and cancelling the caste
certificate issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kelapur dated
15-7-2006 produced by the petitioner.
2 jg.w.p.5935.15.odt
2. The petitioner produced before the said committee about
11 documents out of which 10 documents indicate the caste 'Mana' of
his blood relatives. The Police Vigilance Cell conducted home enquiry
and found that the documents produced are true and correct but it
refers to one document in the name of Bhanu Ragho said to be the
grandfather of the petitioner, which is an entry of birth extract dated
17-10-1939 showing the caste 'Manya'. Except this document, there is
no document placed on record showing the caste other than 'Mana'.
3. The committee relied upon the aforesaid document in
respect of Bhanu Ragho. We therefore called for the record from the
Committee to factually verify the said document. The learned Assistant
Government Pleader, fairly stated that there is no such document
available on record, showing caste 'Manya' in the name of Bhanu, the
grandfather of the petitioner, on 17-10-1939. However, we find that
there is birth register extract in the name of Bhanu Ragho showing the
caste as 'Mana' and not 'Manya' in respect of female child, Biji born on
17-10-1939. Entry was taken in the register on 20-10-1939. The
committee has therefore committed an error in relying upon the entry
which is not in existence, to hold that the caste of the real paternal
3 jg.w.p.5935.15.odt
grandfather of the petitioner was shown caste as 'Manya' on
17-10-1939.
4. In paragraph no. 6 of the order of the Scheduled Tribe
Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati, it is held that the
entries do not describe the relatives of the applicant as belonging to
'Mana' Tribe but it is described as 'Mana' only and therefore, it cannot be
said that the petitioner has established his claim for 'Mana', Scheduled
Tribe. It is further held that none of the persons in the petitioner's
family has earlier availed the status of 'Mana', Scheduled Tribe nor
obtained the certificate of 'Mana', Scheduled Tribe.
5. We have already taken a view in Writ Petition No.
3308/2013 decided on 8th November, 2017 (Gajanan s/o Pandurang
Shende Vs. The Head-Master, Govt. Ashram School and ors.) that
merely because entry 'Mana' is shown in the caste column, it does not
follow that the petitioner does not belong to 'Mana', Scheduled Tribe
category. Similarly, we have also held that where the documents having
probative value are produced on record and the genuineness of it is not
disputed, the question of applying affinity test to reject the claim for
'Mana', Scheduled Tribe does not at all arise. We have considered such
aspects in detail and we need not elaborate it now, except to say that we
4 jg.w.p.5935.15.odt
have held as such, by construing the ratio of various decisions of the
Apex Court.
6. We hold that in view of the fact that the documentary
evidence having probative value establish the claim for 'Mana',
Scheduled Tribe, the Committee fell in error in rejecting the claim and
in our view, the petitioner is entitled to get validity certificate for 'Mana',
Scheduled Tribe.
7. In view of the above, writ petition is allowed as under.
(a) The order dated 24-4-2009 passed by the Scheduled
Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati
invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner is hereby
quashed and set aside.
(b) It is held that the petitioner has established his
claim for 'Mana', Scheduled Tribe which at serial no. 18 in
the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950.
(c) It is held that the caste certificate issued by the
Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kelapur dated 15-7-2006
produced by the petitioner is valid.
5 jg.w.p.5935.15.odt
(d) The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Amravati is directed to issue caste
validity certificate to the petitioner showing that he belongs
to 'Mana', Scheduled Tribe within a period of one month
from the date of production of copy of this judgment to it.
8. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms with no order as to
costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
wasnik
