Bombay High Court
Dipak Namdeo Thakur And Another vs State Common Entrance Test Cell ... on 18 January, 2021
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala, Shrikant Dattatray Kulkarni
1 WP 997-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 997 OF 2021
Dipak Namdeo Thakur
and another .. Petitioners
Versus
State Common Entrance Test Cell,
Through its Commissioner &
Competent Authority
and another .. Respondents
Mr. Mahesh S. Deshmukh, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. P. S. Patil, Addl. G. P. for Respondent No. 2.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATED : 18th JANUARY, 2021.
PER COURT:-
. The tribe claims of the petitioners as belonging to "Thakur"
(Scheduled Tribe) are invalidated.
2. Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
real sister of the petitioners namely Durga D/o Namdeo is granted
validity certificate by the scrutiny committee. Vigilance was also
conducted before grant of validity certificate to Durga. The learned
counsel submits that the petitioners have placed on record
pre-constitutional documents of the grandfather of the petitioners,
paternal aunt of the petitioners showing tribe recorded as "Thakur".
1 of 4
2 WP 997-2021.odt
The respondents are relying on only one contra entry of "Bhat" in the
birth record of an unnamed person shown as son of Rohidas Devidas.
Rohidas is the grandfather of the petitioners. The entry of "Thakur" in
the record of paternal aunt of the petitioners is of the year 1929. The
school record of the petitioners father of the year 1952 records tribe as
"Thakur". The school entry of two other real uncles of the petitioners of
the year 1934 and 1942 records tribe as "Thakur". The petitioners have
denied the relationship of the petitioners with the unnamed person.
The committee has shown him as son of Rohidas. The learned counsel
relies on the judgment in the case of Apoorva Vinay Nichale Vs.
Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No. 1 and others ,
reported in 2010 (6) Mh. L. J. 401 to suggest that validity certificate
granted to the near relative is a relevant fact. According to the learned
counsel, the affinity test is not the litmus test. The reliance is placed on
the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Anand Vs. Committee for
Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and others reported in 2012
(1) SCC 113.
3. Mr. Patil, learned Addl. G. P. submits that the entry of "Bhat" is a
contra entry to tribe "Thakur". The same is in the birth record of the
uncle of the petitioners. The same is of the year 1930. One contra entry
would be sufficient to negate the case of the petitioners. The learned
Addl. G. P. further submits that the petitioners have failed to prove the
2 of 4
3 WP 997-2021.odt
affinity test. The validity certificate granted to the real sister of the
petitioners has been considered by the committee. The same has not
been granted on merits, but on the basis of earlier judgment which no
longer holds a good law.
4. We have considered the submissions canvassed by the learned
counsel for respective parties.
5. The following documents are relied by the parties.
02- izLrqr vtZnkj dz- 1 o 2 ;kauh R;kaP;k tekr nkO;kP;k leFkZukFkZ [kkyhyizek.ks
nLr,sot lknj dsys vkgsr %&
v- nLr,sotkpk nLr,sot/kkjdkps uko vtZnkj Tkkrhph uksan Ukksan.kh fnukad
dz- izdkj ;kaP;k"kh ukrs
1- "kkys; iqjkok fnid ukenso Bkdwj vtZnkj dz- 1 fganw Bkdwj 25-06-1992
2- "kkys; iqjkok Ukkenso jksfgnkl lks;ads oMhy fganw Bkdwj 02-04-1952
3- "kkys; iqjkok fgjke.k jksfgnkl Bkdwj dkdk Bkdwj 05-05-1942
4- Xkko uequk 14 &&&& cki jksfgnkl dkdk Bkdwj 02-08-1934
nsfonkl ¼eqyxk½
5- Lksok iqLrd Ukkenso jksfgnkl lks;ads oMhy Bkdwj fganw 21-10-1964
6- Xkko uequk 14 &&&& cki jksfgnkl vkR;k Bkdwj 02-07-1929
nsfonkl ¼eqyxh½
7- "kkys; iqjkok Lkkxj ukenso Bkdwj vtZnkj dz- 2 fganw Bkdwj 19-06-1997
v- "kS{kf.kd o tUee`R;q uksanhps iqjkos %
v- nLr,sotkps uko fo|kF;kZps uko vtZnkjk"kh ukrs Tkkr izos"k fnukad
dz-
1- "kkys; iqjkok ukenso jksfgnkl Bkdwj oMhy fganw Bkdwj 01-04-1952
2- "kkys; iqjkok fnid Ukkenso Bkdwj vtZnkj dz- 1 fganw Bkdwj 25-06-1992
3- TkUe uksan iqjkok &&&& cki jksfgnkl dkdk HkkV 19-11-1930
nsfonkl
4- TkUe uksan iqjkok ukenso jksfgnkl oMhy Bkdwj 10-02-1944
nsfonkl
3 of 4
4 WP 997-2021.odt
6. It is submitted that vigilance was also conducted while granting
validity to the real sister of the petitioners namely Durga. The first
entry appears to be of the paternal aunt of the petitioners of the year
1929. There are consistent entries of the "Thakur" in the record except
one entry which according to the petitioners is not related to them.
7. The show cause notice is already issued to the real sister of the
petitioners.
8. In view of the above, we pass the following order.
9. The impugned order is set aside. The committee shall issue
validity certificate to the petitioners of "Thakur" (Scheduled Tribe)
immediately. The said validity certificate shall be subject to the decision
that would be taken by the committee in the proceedings re-opened of
the validity holder relied by the petitioners.
10. Writ petition accordingly is disposed of. No costs.
( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI ) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA )
JUDGE JUDGE
P.S.B.
4 of 4
