Devanand Balajirao Chukewad vs Sub Divisional Officer Bhokar And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4826 Bom

                                         1
                                                                     wp3806.18.odt

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          WRIT PETITION NO.3806 OF 2018


 Devanand Balajirao Chukewad,
 Age : 23 years, Occ. Education,
 R/o Mendka, Tq. Mudkhed,
 Dist. Nanded                                ...PETITIONER

          VERSUS

 1.       Sub Divisional Officer,
          Bhokar, Tq. Bhokar,
          Dist. Nanded

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


 Mr S.S. Phatale, Advocate for the petitioner
 Mr P.N. Kutti, A.G.P. for respondents

                                     CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN
                                                   AND
                                             M.G. SEWLIKAR, JJ.

DATE : 17-03-2021

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Ujjal Bhuyan, J.)

Heard Mr Sagar Phatale, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr

Kutti, learned A.G.P. for the respondents.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned Counsel

appearing for the parties finally by consent.

wp3806.18.odt

3. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 03-08-2017, passed by the Sub-

Divisional Officer, Bhokar, District Nanded, declining to issue Scheduled

Tribe certificate to the petitioner as belonging to "Mannerwarlu"

community, which is recognized as a Scheduled Tribe in the State of

Maharashtra. Further challenge made by the petitioner is to the order

dated 23-03-2018, passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificates Scrutiny

Committee, Aurangabad i.e. respondent no.2 rejecting the appeal filed by

the petitioner against the decision of the Sub-Divisional Officer i.e.

respondent no.1. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents to

issue Scheduled Tribe certificate to the petitioner as belonging to

"Mannerwarlu" Scheduled Tribe community.

4. Case of the petitioner is that he belongs to "Mannerwarlu"

Scheduled Tribe community. In this connection, the concerned Talathi as

well as Sarpanch and Gramsevak had issued certificates certifying that

petitioner belongs to "Mannerwarlu" Scheduled Tribe community. When

the petitioner approached respondent no.1 being the competent authority

under the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified

Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and

Special Backward Classes Category (Regulation of Issuance and

Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 for issuance of Scheduled Tribe

wp3806.18.odt

certificate, respondent no.1 directed the concerned Circle Officer to make

an inquiry . It is stated that the said Circle Officer had conducted enquiry

and thereafter submitted report recommending that the petitioner, indeed,

belongs to "Mannerwarlu" Scheduled Tribe community and should,

therefore, be issued the related certificate. Similar recommendation was

also made by the Executive Magistrate of Bhokar.

5. Notwithstanding the same, respondent no.1 by order dated 03-08-

2017 rejected the application of the petitioner.

6. Aggrieved by the above rejection, petitioner preferred appeal before

the Scrutiny Committee - respondent no.2 which is the appellate authority

constituted under Section 5 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes,

Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes,

Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Classes Category

(Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000.

Respondent no.2, by order dated 23-03-2018, rejected the appeal of the

petitioner and affirmed the decision of respondent no.1.

7. Aggrieved, present writ petition has been filed seeking the reliefs as

indicated above.

wp3806.18.odt

8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that father of the

petitioner, namely, Balaji Datta Chukewad has been issued Scheduled

Tribe certificate by the Executive Magistrate, Bhokar on 29-11-1990, who

was then the competent authority to issue such certificate. Identical tribe

certificate was issued to Chukewad Vinod Maroti, cousin brother of the

petitioner from paternal side, which was subsequently validated by the

Scheduled Tribe Certificates Scrutiny Committee. These documents were

placed before respondent no.1. In addition, a genealogy statement was

filed before the respondents indicating the relationship of the petitioner

with father and cousin brother from the paternal side. These documents

were not considered by the respondents by taking a mechanical approach

holding that these are post independence documents.

9. Learned A.G.P. submits that in such matters, ordinarily neither

records are produced nor reply affidavits are filed. Matters are decided on

the basis of pleadings and documents. He fairly submits that considering

the case made out by the petitioner, Court may pass an appropriate order.

10. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.

11. The fact that petitioner's father has been conferred "Mannerwarlu"

Scheduled Tribe certificate is not disputed. Further, the fact that

petitioner's cousin brother from the paternal side has been conferred

wp3806.18.odt

similar certificate has also not been disputed.

12. In Writ Petition No.12479 of 2017, Shubham Harikishan Sonkusre

and two other cases, decided on 01-11-2017, a Division Bench of this

Court held that there cannot be a thumb rule that only if documents prior

to independence are produced, then only caste/tribe certificate is to be

granted. At the time of issuance of tribe/caste certificate, the authorities

are only required to take a prima facie view inasmuch as, after issuance of

such certificate it has to pass the test of scrutiny of the Caste/Tribe

Certificates Scrutiny Committee. Alike in the present case, in those cases

also fathers and paternal uncles of the petitioners were issued tribe

certificates, which were denied to the petitioners. This Court while setting

aside the decisions of the Sub-Divisional Officer and the Scheduled Tribe

Certificates Scrutiny Committee directed the Sub-Divisional Officer to

issue Scheduled Tribe certificate to the petitioners as belonging to the

particular Scheduled Tribe community which would have to undergo

verification by the Scrutiny Committee in due course.

13. We are in respectful agreement with the views expressed by this

Court in Shubham Harikishan Sonkusre (supra) and are of the view that

similar relief may be granted to the present petitioner.

14. Accordingly, we set aside and quash the two impugned orders

dated 03-08-2017 and 23-03-2018 and direct respondent no.1 to issue

wp3806.18.odt

Scheduled Tribe certificate to the petitioner as belonging to "Mannerwarlu"

Scheduled Tribe community, which would however be subject to scrutiny

by the Scheduled Tribe Certificates Scrutiny Committee in due course.

The above certificate shall be issued within a period of four weeks from

the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

15. Writ Petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above.

However, there shall be no order as to costs.

16. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

 (M.G. SEWLIKAR)                                 (UJJAL BHUYAN)
       JUDGE                                          JUDGE


 amj