Namdeo Parasaram Wagh vs The State Of Mah. & Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 7236 Bom

                                                                                228
                                      -1-


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD



                        WRIT PETITION NO. 3224 OF 2002
                     WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO./7818/2011



 Namdeo S/o Parasram Wagh
 Age 43 years, Occ-Service,
 R/o Plot No.51, New Nandanvan Colony,
 Aurangabad, Dist.Aurangabad.          .. PETITIONER

                  VERSUS

 1]       The State of Maharashtra
          [Copy to be served on the
          Govt.Pleader, High Court
          Bench at Aurangabad]

 2]       The Scheduled Tribe Caste
          Certificate Verification Committee
          Through its Chairman/Director,
          Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad.

 3]       The Taluka Executive Magistrate
          Sillod, District Aurangabad.

 4]       The Deputy Conservator of Forests
          Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad

 5]       The Collector,
          Collectorate, Aurangabad.                     ..RESPONDENTS


 Advocate Mr.M.A.Golegaonkar h/f Mr.A.S.Golegaonkar for petitioner
 Additional Government Pleader Mrs.A.V.Gondhalekar for R. 1 to 5.

                                      ...




::: Uploaded on - 22/09/2017                   ::: Downloaded on - 23/09/2017 01:09:11 :::
                                                                                 228
                                    -2-


                               CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA &
                                       MANGESH S. PATIL,JJ.

                               DATE :     15/09/2017


 ORAL JUDGMENT :-

Mr.Golegaonkar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that the Committee while rejecting the tribe claim of the petitioner of

Koli Malhar (Scheduled Tribe) has not considered consistent school

record of the petitioner. It records the caste as Koli Malhar. The

school record of the petitioner's brother also records the caste as

Malhar Koli. Only because the pre-1950 record was not produced,

the committee has negatived the tribe claim of the petitioner. The

learned counsel further submits that the son and the daughter of the

petitioner have been issued with the validity certificate of Koli Malhar

(Scheduled Tribe). The son has been granted the validity certificate

of Koli Malhar (S.T.) on 29/10/2010 and the daughter of the petitioner

has been granted validity certificate of Koli Malhar (S.T.) on 6/6/2011.

The real brother of the petitioner has also been granted a validity

certificate of Koli Malhar (ST) on 14/9/2010. The learned counsel

submits that these are after the invalidation of the tribe claim of the

petitioner.

2] The learned AGP submits that the entry in the record of the

father of the petitioner records the caste as Koli and not Malhar Koli.

The basic document is against the petitioner. No documents having

high probative value of the period prior to 1950 are produced on

record. The petitioner has also failed in the affinity test. Considering

the above, the judgment is rightly passed by the Committee.

3] From the documents filed on record alongwith Civil Application

to the present Writ Petition, it is manifest that son of the petitioner viz.

Mukesh Namdeo Wagh has been issued with the validity certificate

of Koli Malhar (ST) on 29/10/2010. The daughter of the petitioner

viz. Suvarna Namdeo Wagh is issued with the validity certificate of

Koli Malhar (ST) on 6/5/2011. The real brother of the petitioner viz.

Gulabrao Parashuram Wagh is issued with the validity certificate of

Koli Malhar (S.T.) on 14/9/2010. The school record of the petitioner,

his brother consistently records the caste as Koli Malhar (ST) The

affinity cannot be the sole test for determination. The affinity test can

at the most be a corroborative piece of evidence. Considering the

voluminous record in the shape of the validation granted to the son,

daughter and real brother of the petitioner and also the other record,

we do not see any impediment to direct the Committee to grant

validity to the petitioner.

4] In the result, the impugned judgment and order is quashed and

set aside. The Committee shall issue validity certificate to the

petitioner of Koli Malhar (S.T.) Rule made absolute in above terms.

5] In view of disposal of Writ Petition, Civil Application is disposed

of.

(MANGESH S. PATIL,J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)

umg/