Bombay High Court
Shivam S/O Janardhan Thakur vs The State Of Maharashtra, Dept. Of ... on 23 December, 2022
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, Anil Laxman Pansare
1/4 Judg.34.wp.7682.2022.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 7682 OF 2022
Shivam s/o Janardhan Thakur
Age - 19 Years, Occupation - Student;
Original R/o Aswand, Tq. Sangrampur,
Dist. Buldhana.
Presently residing at - Prachitrayi Nagar,
Taloshi Road, Ghoti, Tq. Igatpuri, Dist.
Nashik. ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Department of Tribal Development,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
Through its Secretary.
2. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati Division, Amravati,
Through its Member Secretary. ... RESPONDENTS
Mr. A. P. Chaware, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. A. A. Madiwale, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents.
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ.
DATE : DECEMBER 23, 2022.
ORAL JUDGMENT - [PER ANIL L. PANSARE, J.].
. Heard Mr. Chaware, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.
Madiwale, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents.
2/4 Judg.34.wp.7682.2022.odt
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent
of the learned Counsel for the parties.
3. By this Petition the Petitioner takes an exception to the order
dated 16/11/2022 passed by the Respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee,
thereby invalidating the tribe claim of the Petitioner as belonging to
'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe.
4. The Petitioner's claim has been invalidated on the ground that
some of the documents belonging to the Petitioner's ancestors would
indicate caste 'Marathe', 'Hindu-Thakur' etc. There being discrepancy in
the caste mentioned in these documents, the tribe claim of the Petitioner
has been invalidated. However, our attention has been drawn to the oldest
document dated 26/08/1929 showing caste of great grand-father of the
Petitioner as 'Thakur'.
5. We have noticed from the original record that the document is
placed on the file, which substantiate the claim of the Petitioner that said
document was filed before the Scrutiny Committee. That apart, in
Vigilance Cell Report there is a mention of said document. It is stated that
the Vigilance Officer has examined extract of Birth and Death Certificate
maintained at village Aswand, Tahsil Sangrampur, District Buldhana. The
Entry is dated 26/08/1929. It is mentioned that a son Tukaram has been
born to great grand-father Namdeo of the Petitioner. The caste 'Thakur' is
mentioned in the said entry. This being oldest and pre-constitutional
document, has a high probative value. It appears that the document has
3/4 Judg.34.wp.7682.2022.odt
not been considered by the Scrutiny Committee. We do not find any
reason why the Scrutiny Committee has not considered the said
document.
6. The said document will have material bearing on the
adjudication of the tribe claim of the Petitioner. The same having not been
considered, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter back for
consideration afresh, which obviously could be done after setting aside the
impugned order. Hence the following order.
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.
(ii) The order dated 16/11/2022 passed by the Scrutiny Committee is
quashed and set aside.
(iii) The proceedings are remanded back to the Scrutiny Committee for
fresh consideration, especially the document referred to in the
Judgment, to enable the Scrutiny Committee to reconsider the
Petitioner's claim.
(iv) The Petitioner shall appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 3 rd
January, 2023. Since the Petitioner is a student, the entire exercise
of verification be completed within a period of four months from
that date.
4/4 Judg.34.wp.7682.2022.odt
7. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. No costs. All points
raised in the Writ Petition are kept open.
(ANIL L. PANSARE, J.) (A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
Yadav VG
Digitally Signed ByVIJAYA
GOURISHANKAR YADAV
Signing Date:23.12.2022
19:05
