Devidas Ramesh Sinde vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 16763 Bom

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 2465 OF 2021


       Gurav s/o Gajanan Shinde, Age              ..      PETITIONER
       17 years (Minor), Occ. Student,
       u/g of father viz. Gajanan
       Dasrao Shinde, Age 44 years,
       Occ. Service, R/o. A/P Pethwadaj,
       Tq. Kandhar, District Nanded

       VERSUS

1.     The State of Maharashtra,                  ..      RESPONDENTS
       Department of Tribal Development
       Mantralaya, Mumbai-32, Through
       its Secretary

2.     The Scheduled Tribe Certificate
       Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad
       Division, Aurangabad, Through
       its Member Secretary

                                  WITH
                       WRIT PETITION NO. 2467 OF 2021


       Devidas s/o Ramesh Shinde, Age             ..      PETITIONER
       19 years, Occ. Student,
       R/o. A/P Pethwadaj,
       Tq. Kandhar, District Nanded

       VERSUS

1.     The State of Maharashtra,                  ..      RESPONDENTS
       Department of Tribal Development
       Mantralaya, Mumbai-32, Through
       its Secretary
2.     The Scheduled Tribe Certificate
       Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad



 ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2021                ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2021 03:59:48 :::
                                                             WP 2465,2467.21
                                    2

       Division, Aurangabad, Through
       its Member Secretary

.............................................................................................
Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar, Advocate for the petitioners in both the Writ
Petitions.
Mr. P. S. Patil, A.G.P. for the respondents in both the Writ Petitions.
 ..........................................................................................


                                CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA
                                         & R.N. LADDHA, JJ.

                                DATE :   3rd DECEMBER, 2021



O R D E R: PER R. N. LADDHA, J.


               The tribe claim of the petitioner-Gaurav (Writ Petition

No.2465 of 2021) and the petitioner Devidas s/o Ramesh Shinde (Writ

Petition No.2467 of 2021) came to be rejected by the respondent

Scrutiny Committee vide impugned order dated 29th January, 2021.



2.             Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar, learned counsel for the

petitioners submits that the petitioners are exploring possibility of

admission to the professional course.       He submits that the real

paternal uncle of the petitioners, namely Nagnath Dasrao Shinde and

the cousin brother of father of the petitioners namely Uttam Hari

Shinde are issued validity certificate of 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe.




 ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2021                ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2021 03:59:48 :::
                                                              WP 2465,2467.21
                                    3

According to the learned counsel for the petitioners it is mandatory to

issue Caste Validity Certificate if the validity is already issued to blood

relatives of the petitioners. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the

Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale

Vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee and others,

reported in, 2010 (6) Mh.L.J. 401. It has been submitted that the

Caste Validity Certificates produced on record of blood relatives have

been overlooked.



3.             The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Anand Vs. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims,

reported in, AIR 2012 SC 314 is relied upon to submit that the affinity

test is not litmus test for establishing the link of the petitioners with a

scheduled tribe.



4.             On the other hand, the learned A.G.P. appearing for

respondents has submitted that the vigilance report giving all the

details regarding social, cultural, anthropological traits, characteristic

and traditions have been considered properly by the respondent

Committee. He further submits that the validity certificates have been

obtained by the near relations of the petitioners by suppressing or




 ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2021                 ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2021 03:59:48 :::
                                                                    WP 2465,2467.21
                                            4

withholding material facts from the Committee.                   There are many

contra entries, which were suppressed while validity was issued to the

blood relatives of the petitioners.



5.             The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that apart

from their own documents, the petitioners had produced the school

record of the blood relatives wherein caste is recorded as 'Thakur'. The

petitioners had also produced land records in the form as Khasra

Patrak of the year 1954, National Register of Citizens of the year 1951,

Lawni Patrak of 1349 Fasli i.e. of the year 1939 to substantiate their

claim. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, as per the

practice prevailing at the relevant time, the caste 'Thakur' was

mentioned in place of their surname.                According to the learned

counsel, all these land revenue documents did not have a caste column

and as such, the documents could not be considered as misdirected

itself in law. It is no doubt, true that there is no Caste-Tribe column in

these documents.                The very fact, however, that the persons are

identified by the word 'Thakur' which is Notified Scheduled Tribe

would by itself be a strong factor in favour of the petitioners. All these

aspects are highlighted in the case of Shri Prasad s/o Sakharam Pawar

Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others in Writ Petition No.4514 of




 ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2021                       ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2021 03:59:48 :::
                                                                WP 2465,2467.21
                                      5

2002 decided on 18 November 2003.



6.             The relationship of the petitioners with the validity holders

as claimed by them is not disputed. There are paternal relatives of the

petitioners, who are issued with the validity certificates of "Thakur

Scheduled Tribe". The same is relevant fact. The affinity test is not

litmus test for establishing the link of the petitioners with a scheduled

tribe as enunciated by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of

Anand (supra). Area restriction has been removed pursuant to the

presidential Order of Scheduled Tribes (Amendment) Act, 1976. In

this context, the reliance can be placed upon the ruling of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Palaghat Jila Thandan Samuday

Sanrakshan Samiti and Anr. Vs. State of Kerala and Anr, reported in,

(1994 (1) SCC 359.



7.             In view of the above, we pass the following Order:



                                  ORDER

I. The Committee shall issue the validity certificate to the

petitioners of Thakur Scheduled Tribe immediately.

II. The said validity certificates will be subject to the

WP 2465,2467.21

decision that would be taken by the Committee in the

proceedings re-opened of the validity holders relied by

the petitioners.

III. Writ Petitions accordingly stand disposed of. No costs.

R. N. LADDHA, J. S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. SRM/3/12/21