Bombay High Court
Vedsagar Rajesh Suryawanshi vs The State Of Maharashtra Htr Its ... on 19 January, 2021
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala, Shrikant Dattatray Kulkarni
965-ThakurST1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
965 WRIT PETITION NO.1006 OF 2021
VEDSAGAR RAJESH SURYAWANSHI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
AND
965 WRIT PETITION NO.1007 OF 2021
RUCHA PRAVIN SURYAWANSHI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Petitioners :Mr Yeramwar Sushant C.
AGP for Respondents State: Mr. S. R. Yadav-Lonikar
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATE : 19th January, 2021
ORDER:
1. Caste claim of the petitioners as Thakur Scheduled Tribe is
invalidated. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petitions.
2. Mr. Yeramwar, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
grandfather of the petitioners namely Pundlik Ramdas Suryawanshi is
issued with validity certificate of Thakur Scheduled Tribe under order of
this Court in Writ Petition No. 3870/1997 dated 16.12.2004. The learned
counsel further submits that cousin of the petitioners namely Tushar
Madhukar Suryawanshi is also issued with the validity certificate of Thakur
Scheduled Tribe.
3. Learned counsel submits that the documents of the great
grandfather of the petitioners for the years 1912, 1916, 1919, 1923
records caste as Thakur. The respondents had relied on an isolated entry
965-ThakurST1
in the school record of Dangal Ziparu Thakur wherein the caste is recorded
as Hindu Thakur Bramhabhat. According to the learned counsel, this
Court had granted validity to the real grandfather of the petitioners and
the same would be binding on the respondents. The Committee has
wrongly observed that under the orders of this Court, the grandfather was
not issued with the validity but the same was regarding issuance of caste
certificate. The learned counsel relies on the judgment in the case of
Apoorva Vinay Nichale Vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
reported in 2010 (6) Mh.LJ 401 to submit that validity issued to the near
paternal relative is a relevant fact.
4. The learned A.G.P. submits that the committee has taken decision
to file review in respect of the order dated 16.12.2004 in Writ Petition No.
3870/1997 filed by the grandfather of the petitioners. The learned A.G.P.
further submits that the petitioners have failed to prove the affinity test.
There are contra entries on record.
5. We have considered the submissions.
6. The petitioners have produced the following documents:
v-dz- nLr,stkps uko fo+n;kF;kZps uko vtZnkj dz- 1 tkr izos'k fnukad
;kaP;k'kh ukrs
1- 'kkys; iqjkok HkkbZnkl HkkoMq Bkdwj pyr iatksck Bkdwj 10-02-1916
uequk ua-1 rs 7 e/khy f'kYyd jsdkWMZ ikfgys vlrk lnj ukokph dwByhgh uksan vk<Gqu vkyh ukgh-vls v'kk
vk'k;kps vfHkizk; iksyhl n{krk iFkdkl eq[;k/;kid ;kauh fnysyk vkgs-
2- 'kkys; iqjkok jkenkl HkkoMq Bkdqj pqyr iatksck ------ --------
uequk ua-1 rs 7 e/khy f'kYyd jsdkWMZ ikfgys vlrk lnj ukokph dqByhgh uksan vk<Gqu vkyh ukgh vls- v'kk
vk'k;kpk vfHkizk; iksyhl n{krk iFkdkl eq[;k/;kid ;kauh fnysyk vkgs-
3- 'kkys; iqjkok pS+=ke HkkoMq Bkdqj pqyr iatksck Bkdqj tUe rkjh[k 12-05-
965-ThakurST1
4 'kkys; iqjkok xksihpan HkkoMq Bkdqj pqyr iatksck vkfgj 17-02-1917
Bkdqj
5- tUe e`R;w uksan f'kojke [kqeku cki [kq'kky pqyr iatksck Bkdqj 12-06-1916
Bkdqj
6- tUe e`R;q uksan ¼eqyxk ½[kqeku [kq'kky pqyr iatksck Bkdqj 28-07-1919
7- tUe e`R;q uksan j?kqukFk [kqeku [kq'kky pqyr iatksck Bkdqj 28-03-1923
8- tUe e`R;q uksan [kq'kky rqdMq Bkdqj pqyr [kkij Bkdqj 22-02-1923
iatksck
9- tUe e`R;q uksan nsodh [kqeku [kq'kky pqyr [kkij Bkdqj 06-12-1927
iatksckph eqyxh
10- tUe e`R;q uksan [kqeku [kq'kky pqyr [kkij Bkdqj 01-11-1938
iatksck
11- tUe e`R;q uksan f>i: [kqeku Bkdqj pqyr pqyr Bkdqj 12-06-1941
iatksck
12- 'kkys; iqjkok f>i: [kqeku Bkdqj pqyr iatksck Bkdqj fgaUnq tUe fnukad
04-08-1995
13- 'kkys; iqjkok n;kjke [kq'kky Bkdqj pqyr [kkij Bkdqj 05-04-1916
iatksck
14- 'kkys; iqjkok vkuank [kqeku Bkdqj pqyr [kkij czEgHkkV ekpZ 1926
iatksck
15- 'kkys; iqjkok mRre cGjke Bkdqj pqyr iatksck Bkdqj 14-02-1929
16- 'kkys; iqjkok mRre cGjke Bkdqj pqyr iatksck Bkdqj 02-08-1930
¼czEgHkkV½
17- 'kkys; iqjkok j-ua-1416 naxy f>i: Bkdqj pqyr vktksck fgaUnq Bkdqj tUe fnukad
czEgHkkV 27-11-1937
18- 'kkys; iqjkok j-ua-190 naxy f>i: Bkdqj pqyr vktksck Bkdqj nk[ky fnukad
czEgHkkV fujad 'kk-lks-fnukad
01-02-1952
19- 'kkys; iqjkok j-ua-3080 naxy f>i: Bkdqj pqyr vktksck Bkdqj nk[ky fnukad
czEgHkkV 10-03-1952
20- 'kkys; iqjkok fd'kksj naxy Bkdqj pqyr dkdk fgqUnq Bkdqj 05-03-1968
21- 'kkys; iqjkok fouksn naxy Bkdqj pqyr dkdk fgaUnq Bkdqj 22-03-1968
22- 'kkys; iqjkok v'kksd naxy lq;Zoa'kh pqyr dkdk fgaUnq Bkdqj 22-02-1969
23- 'kkys; iqjkok ixkj fd'kksj Bkdqj pqyr HkkÅ fganq Bkdqj 02-06-1992
24- 'kkys; iqjkok HkkX;Jh fouksn Bkdqj pqyr cfg.k fganq Bkdqj 05-06-1995
25- 'kkys; iqjkok fodkl v'kksd Bkdqj pqyr HkkÅ fganq Bkdqj 22-07-2000
26- 'kkys; iqjkok fnid fouksn Bkdqj pqyr HkkÅ fganq Bkdqj 01-07-2000
27- 'kkys; iqjkok ;kfeuh lqHkk"k lq;Zoa'kh pqyr cgh.k fganq Bkdqj 14-06-2004
7. It is a matter of record that real grandfather of the petitioner
namely Pundlik Ramdas Suryawanshi had applied for validity certificate of
965-ThakurST1
Thakur Scheduled Tribe. The same was invalided. He filed appeal before
the Commissioner, the appellate authority at the relevant time. At the
relevant time appeal was provided against the order of the Committee. The
appeal was dismissed. Then he filed writ petition No. 3870/1997. The
Division Bench of this Court, under order dated 16.12.2004, allowed the
writ petition and validity was granted to the real grandfather of the
petitioners of Thakur Scheduled Tribe. When this Court has already
granted validity to the real grandfather of the petitioners it would not be
appropriate take different view, more particularly when the old documents
substantiate the case of the petitioners.
8. In light of the aforesaid facts, we pass the following order:
ORDER
i. The impugned judgment and order passed by the Committee
quashed and set aside.
ii. The Committee shall issue validity certificates to the petitioners of
Thakur Scheduled tribe.
iii. In case the Committee succeeds in getting the order dated
16.12.2004 in Writ Petition No. 3870/1997 reviewed, then the
present judgment and order would be subject to the same.
iv. Writ petitions disposed of. No costs.
(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.)
JPC
