Bombay High Court
Sailee Avinash Nagpure vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 17 August, 2022
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala, Madhav J. Jamdar
28.WPNo.61192017(J).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6119 OF 2017
Sailee Avinash Nagpure ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. Ramchandra Kanu Mendadkar, Advocate for the
Petitioner.
Mr. N. C. Walimbe, AGP for the Respondents/State.
CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA &
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, JJ.
DATED : AUGUST 17, 2022
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of
the parties, heard fnally.
2. The caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to the
Halba Scheduled Tribe is negatived. Aggrieved thereby, the
present writ petition.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
cousin aunt of the petitioner namely Gayatrilaxmi is issued
with the Validity Certifcate under the orders of the
Supreme Court in a case of Gayatrilaxmi Bapurao Nagpure
versus the State of Maharashtra1. The father of the
petitioner is also issued with the Validity Certifcate by the
Commissioner under the orders of the Government. Cousin
uncle of the petitioner i.e. Chetan is also issued Validity
1 1996(3) SCC 685.
Gaikwad RD 1/3
28.WPNo.61192017(J).doc
Certifcate of Halba Scheduled Tribe. All these Validity
Certifcates are negatived on the ground that the affnity is
not proved.
4. The learned AGP submits that the school entries in the
record of petitioner's paternal side relatives of pre-
constitutional era recorded caste as "Nagpure". The same
have more probative value. According to learned AGP, the
petitioner has failed in the affnity test.
5. We have considered the submissions, so also gone
through the judgment and documents placed on record.
6. The affnity test is not a litmus test as is held in,
Anand versus Committee for Scrutiny and Verifcation of
Tribe Claims & Ors.2
7. It would appear that the Committee has not disputed
the relationship of petitioner with Gayatrilaxmi and Chetan
- daughter and son of Bapurao. They are the frst cousins.
Gayatrilaxmi is the paternal aunt and Chetan is the
paternal uncle.
8. The caste claim of the cousin aunt of petitioner -
Gayatrilaxmi daughter of Bapurao Nagpure was also
invalidated. She fled a petition before this Court. The writ
petition was dismissed. She approached the Apex Court.
The Apex Court in a reported judgment ( supra) set aside
the orders of Committee and this Court and directed
Committee to issue Validity Certifcate to her. Eventually,
the Validity Certifcate is issued to Gayatrilaxmi pursuant to
the order of Apex Court. The Committee has also issued
Validity Certifcate to the father of the petitioner and cousin
2 2012 (1) SCC 113.
Gaikwad RD 2/3
28.WPNo.61192017(J).doc
uncle namely Chetan.
9. This Court in case of Apoorva versus Divisional Caste
Certifcate Scrutiny Committee No.13 has held that the
validity certifcate issued to the paternal relatives is the
relevant fact. In view of the judgment of Apex Court in case
of paternal aunt of petitioner namely Gayatrilaxmi, the
Committee had no option but to validate the caste claim of
the petitioner.
10. In light of the above, the impugned order is quashed
and set aside. The Committee shall issue the Validity
Certifcate to the petitioner as Halba Scheduled Tribe within
four weeks from today. Rule is accordingly made absolute.
11. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)
Digitally
signed by
RAJU
RAJU DATTATRAYA
DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD Date:
2022.08.20
19:28:35
+0530
3 2010(6) Mh.L.J. 401.
Gaikwad RD 3/3
