Suresh S/O Namde Gajbhe vs The Scheduled Tribe Caste ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 11372 Bom

WP 6811-2013                                    1                       Judgment

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                       NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 6811 OF 2013

Suresh S/o Namdeo Gajbhe,
Aged about 47 years, Occ. Service,
R/o Saoner, District Nagpur.
                                                                    PETITIONER
                                  .....VERSUS.....
The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Gadchiroli.
                                                                   RESPONDENT

           Ms. Himani Kavi h/f Ms. P.D. Rane, Advocate for the petitioner.
     Shri D.P. Thakre, Additional Government Pleader for the respondent/ State.


CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND M.W. CHANDWANI, JJ.

DATE : 10/11/2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

The challenge raised in this Writ Petition is to the order

passed by the Scrutiny Committee dated 17/5/2013 thereby invalidating

the tribe claim of the petitioner of belonging to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he and his forefathers

belong to 'Mana' community which is recognized as Scheduled Tribe vide

entry No.18 of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. In

support of such claim, the petitioner sought to rely upon an old revenue

record of the year 1932-33 indicating the reference of the word 'Mana'

against the name of the petitioner's grandfather. The petitioner also

sought to rely upon a validity certificate issued to his cousin brother on

10/6/2010. When the claim was sought to be examined by the Scrutiny WP 6811-2013 2 Judgment

Committee, it called a report of the vigilance cell. In the report of the

vigilance cell dated 17/1/2013, a reference has been made to two old

documents of the years 1921-22 and 1955. In the report dated

28/12/2012, it has been stated that in the old documents, the entry

'Mana' has been found. The Scrutiny Committee however while deciding

the tribe claim discarded the document of the year 1932-33 for the reason

that it was not mentioned therein after the word 'Mana' that the person

named belonged to Scheduled Tribe. The validity certificate granted to

the cousin brother was also ignored. By the said order dated 17/1/2013,

the Scrutiny Committee invalidated the petitioner's tribe claim.

Being aggrieved, the petitioner has challenged the aforesaid

order.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that

considering the two documents of pre-independence era of the years

1921-22 and 1932-33 with the entry 'Mana', it was clear that the said old

documents had great probative value and they were not liable to be

ignored. Even in the revenue record of the year 1955, same entry was

found. The validity certificate issued to the cousin brother was not liable

to be discarded only on the ground that the same was issued in the light

of the decision in State of Maharashtra & Ors. Vs. Mana Adim Jamat

Mandal (Civil Appeal No. 5270/2004 decided on 8/3/2006). In support WP 6811-2013 3 Judgment

of her submissions, the learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance

on the decisions in Ku. Nayan d/o Bhaskar Chouke Vs. The Scheduled

Tribes Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur & Anr. [Writ Petition No.

491/2019 decided on 16/7/2021] and in Ku. Pallavi d/o Rajendra

Dardemal Vs. The Vice-Chairman/ Member Secretary, Scheduled Tribe

Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur & Ors. [Writ Petition No.

309/2021 decided on 20/7/2022]. It was thus submitted that the order

passed by the Scrutiny Committee was liable to be set aside.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the

respondent supported the impugned order. He relied upon the record of

the Scrutiny Committee and submitted that after due consideration of the

material on record, the Scrutiny Committee indicated its dissatisfaction

with the old documents on record. The validity certificate having been

issued to the petitioner's cousin on the strength of the order passed by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court, much value could not be attached to the same. It

was thus submitted that the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee did

not call for any interference.

5. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and we

have also perused the record maintained by the Scrutiny Committee.

6. In the report of the vigilance cell, it has been clearly stated

that the old documents of the years 1921-22 and 1955 had been WP 6811-2013 4 Judgment

examined. The entry 'Mana' was found therein. The document of the year

1932-33 also bears a similar entry. It is thus clear that the three old

documents relied upon by the petitioner do not bear any adverse entry

and in all the documents, there is mention of the word 'Mana'. Two of

these documents being of pre-independence era are entitled to be given

necessary weightage having more probative value. The Scrutiny

Committee in the impugned order has disregarded the document of the

year 1932-33 only for the reason that after the word 'Mana', it has not

been stated that the same pertains to Scheduled Tribe. The Scheduled

Tribe Order having come into force in the year 1950, this reason put forth

by the Scrutiny Committee cannot be accepted.

7. As regards the validity certificate granted to the petitioner's

cousin, the same is also required to be given due weightage. The effect of

issuing a validity certificate pursuant to the directions issued in Civil

Appeal No. 5270/2004 has been considered by this Court in its decisions

in Ku. Nayan Bhaskar Chouke and in Ku. Pallavi d/o Rajendra Dardemal

(supra) wherein it has been held that in absence of the stand of the

Scrutiny Committee that such validity certificate was issued without due

enquiry, the same could not be disregarded. We further find that the

decision of this Court in Gitesh s/o Narendra Ghormare Vs. Scheduled

Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee Nagpur and others [2018(4) Mh.L.J.

933] also supports the case of the petitioner wherein this Court has WP 6811-2013 5 Judgment

considered the effect of old entries of the nature similar to 'Mana'.

8. We therefore find that there is sufficient material on record in

the form of pre-independence material on the basis of which the tribe

claim of the petitioner ought to have been accepted by the Scrutiny

Committee. The impugned order has been passed without considering the

law laid down by this Court in its earlier decisions. In the light of the

consistent record coupled with the report of the vigilance cell which

favours the petitioner, it is not possible to sustain the order passed by the

Scrutiny Committee.

9. Hence for the aforesaid reasons, the order passed by the

Scrutiny Committee on 17/5/2013 is set aside. It is declared that the

petitioner has proved that he belongs to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe. The

Scrutiny Committee shall within a period of six weeks from the date of

receipt of copy of this judgment issue validity certificate to the petitioner

accordingly.

10. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

                                    (M.W. CHANDWANI, J.)             (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

                         SUMIT



Digitally signed bySUMIT CHETAN
AGRAWAL
Signing Date:11.11.2022 15:35