Yashwant S/O Manohar Ghodmare vs Vice-Chairman/Member Secr. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 11518 Bom

WP 909-21                                      1                        Judgment

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                      NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 909/2021

Yashwant S/o Manohar Ghodmare,
Aged about 19 yrs, Occ. Student,
R/o At-Post Kalambi, Tah. Kalmeshwar, Distt. Nagpur.               PETITIONER

                                  .....VERSUS.....

1.    The Vice-Chairman/Member Secretary,
      Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
      Adiwasi Vikas Bhavan, Giripeth, Nagpur.
2.    The Principal, K.Z.S. Science College, Bramhani
      Kalmeshwar, Tah. Kalmeshwar, Distt. Nagpur.
3.    The Vice-Chancellor/Registrar,
      Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University,
      Nagpur.                                                    RESPONDENTS

                 Ms Preeti D. Rane, counsel for the petitioner.
     Mrs. T.H. Khan, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent no.1.
                     None for the respondent nos.2 and 3.


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

DATE : NOVEMBER 14, 2022.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned

counsel for the parties.

2. The challenge raised in this writ petition is to the order

passed by the Scrutiny Committee dated 30.07.2018 thereby

invalidating the tribe claim of the petitioner of belonging to 'Mana'

Scheduled Tribe.

WP 909-21 2 Judgment

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

belong to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe. To substantiate such claim the

petitioner sought to rely upon various old documents including the

revenue extract of the years 1892-1896 in respect of the great great

grandfather of the petitioner and the School Leaving Certificate dated

18.09.1922 of the great grandfather of the petitioner. The Scrutiny

Committee while considering these old documents preferred to rely upon

a document of the year 1912-13 which had the entry 'Kunbi'. It also

relied upon another document of the year 1922 with the entry 'Kunbi

Mana'. On that count it was held that the documents relied upon by the

petitioner did not substantiate his claim. As regards the aspect of affinity

the Scrutiny Committee preferred to refer to the area affinity test and

found that the petitioner and his forefathers did not hail from the area

where members of the 'Mana' community were found. It was also

observed that the petitioner and his family members did not indicate the

traits of members of the 'Mana' community. On that count, the tribe

claim of the petitioner was invalidated.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the

documents of the years 1892-1896 as well as the School Leaving

Certificate issued to Shankar Zibal in 1922 who was the great grandfather

of the petitioner. It was submitted that since the old documents relied WP 909-21 3 Judgment

upon by the petitioner had entry 'Mana' due weightage ought to have

been given to those old documents. By relying upon the subsequent

documents of the years 1912-13 and 1922 the claim could not have been

invalidated. The old documents having been verified by the Vigilance

Cell they were entitled to due weightage. By failing to consider the said

documents the Scrutiny Committee committed an error. It was then

submitted that while considering the aspect of affinity the area

restrictions were sought to be relied upon for depriving the petitioner of

affinity. The yardsticks applicable for 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe were

sought to be applied in the present case which was not justified. Except

by referring to the old texts it was observed that the petitioner did not

have affinity with 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe. In support, the learned

counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decisions in Gajanan Pandurang

Shende Versus Head-Master, Govt. Ashram School, Dongargaon Salod &

Others [2018(2) Mh.L.J. 460], Gitesh Narendra Ghormare Versus

Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur & Others

[2018(4) Mh.L.J. 933] and Umesh Ganeshrao Jambhore Versus Vice-

Chairman/Member-Secretary, Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny

Committee, Amravati & Others [2022(3) Mh.L.J. 31]. It was thus

submitted that the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee was liable

to be set aside and a validity certificate ought to be issued to the

petitioner.

WP 909-21 4 Judgment

5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent

no.1 supported the impugned order. She produced the record maintained

by the Scrutiny Committee and submitted that after considering the

overall material on record the Scrutiny Committee was justified in turning

down the claim of the petitioner. The old documents had various entries

including the entries 'Kunbi', 'Kunbi Mana' and so on. Therefore it was

clear that the documentary material did not support the case of the

petitioner. Even the affinity test was not duly satisfied by the petitioner

which was clear from the answers given to the questionnaire as

submitted. Hence no interference with the impugned order was called

for.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and we

have perused the record maintained by the Scrutiny Committee. It is seen

that the petitioner has relied upon the old documents of the years 1892-

1896 of his great great grandfather which bears the entry 'Mana'. There

is yet another School Leaving Certificate dated 18.09.1922 of the great

grandfather of the petitioner with the entry 'Mana'. It is also seen that

there are other documents of the years 1912-1913 and 1922 with the

entry 'Kunbi Mana'. The Scrutiny Committee while considering Issue

No.1 has merely brushed aside the old documents of the years 1892-1896

and 1922. No cogent reasons have been given for discarding those WP 909-21 5 Judgment

documents despite the fact that they had the entry 'Mana'. If the Scrutiny

Committee desired to discard the old documents it ought to have assigned

reasons for the same. Instead it sought to rely upon the subsequent

documents of the year 1912-1913 and 1922 on the ground that the entry

shown was 'Kunbi Mana'. We find that it was necessary for the Scrutiny

Committee to have specifically considered the document of the years

1892-1896 and the School Leaving Certificate dated 18.09.1922

alongwith the entries made therein.

7. As regards the aspect of affinity is concerned, it is seen that

the Scrutiny Committee has referred to the aspect of area affinity and has

observed that the petitioner could not establish the same. However while

discussing Point No.4 in the impugned order, the Scrutiny Committee has

referred to the decisions applicable with regard to 'Thakur' Scheduled

Tribe. It was necessary for the Scrutiny Committee to have considered the

decisions rendered especially with regard to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe. We

also find that while answering Issue No.9 no specific reasons have been

mentioned as to how the petitioner had failed to establish cultural affinity

with members of the 'Mana' community. Except for stating that the

answers given by the petitioner to the questionnaire were not satisfactory

there is no further discussion. It was necessary for the Scrutiny

Committee to have independently considered the aspect of affinity.

WP 909-21 6 Judgment

8. Thus on perusing the records of the Scrutiny Committee and

the reasons assigned by it coupled with the decisions of this Court in

Gajanan Pandurang Shende and Gitesh Narendra Gormare (supra) we

find it necessary to direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide the

petitioner's tribe claim afresh by specifically considering the oldest

documents and by applying the proper affinity test. Adjudication of the

tribe claim would definitely affect the petitioner and his family members

and hence consideration of the documents in detail alongwith affinity

with 'Mana' community is necessary. Thus for failure to consider all the

material on record and failure to apply the proper test pursuant to the

decisions of this Court, the impugned order passed by the Scrutiny

Committee is found to be not sustainable.

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

Committee on 30.07.2018 is quashed and set aside. The proceedings are

sent back to the Scrutiny Committee for deciding the petitioner's tribe

claim in the light of the decisions referred to hereinabove after considering

all the record. The Scrutiny Committee shall take a fresh decision in

accordance with law and preferably within a period of four months from

the date of the petitioner's appearance before the Scrutiny Committee.

The petitioner shall appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 01.12.2022.

All the points raised by the petitioner on merits are kept open.

 WP 909-21                                7                          Judgment

10.         The writ petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms.           Rule

accordingly. No costs.


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


APTE




                                                    Signed By: Digitally signed
                                                    byROHIT DATTATRAYA
                                                    APTE
                                                    Signing Date:17.11.2022 15:20