Bombay High Court
Shivam S/O Gajanan Ingle vs Schedule Tribe Caste Certificate ... on 19 October, 2022
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, M. W. Chandwani
46-J-WP-5650-21 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.5650 OF 2021
Shivam S/o Gajanan Ingle
Age : 18 Yrs., Occ : Student
R/o Khetan Nagar, Kaulkhed, Akola,
Tq. & Dist. Akola 444005 ... Petitioner
-vs-
Schedule Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Old By Pass,
Chaprashipura, Amravati, Through
its Vice Chairman/Jt. Commissioner ... Respondent
Shri Ankush P. Kalmegh, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms T. H. Khan, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent.
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND M. W. CHANDWANI, JJ.
DATE : October 19, 2022
Oral Judgment : (Per : A. S. Chandurkar, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned
counsel for the parties.
The challenge raised in this writ petition is to the order passed
by the Scrutiny Committee on 02/11/2020 invalidating the tribe-claim
of the petitioner of belonging to "Thakur" (Schedule Tribe). In support
of such claim the petitioner relied upon various pre-constitutional
documents as well as validity certificate granted to his uncle Sandip
Ingle in the light of such adjudication in Writ Petition No.5251/2019
(Sandip s/o Vitthal Ingle vs. Schedule Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee) dated 29/07/2019. By relying upon the decision in
46-J-WP-5650-21 2/3
Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee No.1 and ors. 2010(6) Mh.L.J. 401, it is submitted on
behalf of the petitioner that since this Court has considered the very
same documents on which the petitioner's uncle had relied upon, it
was not permissible for the Scrutiny Committee to have arrived at a
different conclusion.
2. The claim is opposed by the learned Assistant Government
Pleader for the respondent on the ground that the Scrutiny Committee
has considered the old documents before concluding that the petitioner
and his forefathers did not belong to "Thakur" (Schedule Tribe).
3. It is not in dispute that the claim of the petitioner's uncle was
adjudicated by this Court in Writ Petition No.5251/2019. It was
concluded that the claim of belonging to "Thakur" Schedule Tribe was
liable to be upheld. This adjudication has attained finality and said
petitioner has been issued a validity certificate. While considering this
aspect, the Scrutiny Committee in paragraph 27(1) has sought to
discard that validity certificate on the ground that an entry of 1922
showing the caste "Bhat" was not disclosed by the petitioner and his
uncle. In this regard if the reply of the petitioner dated 23/10/2020
to the vigilance report is perused, it is seen that in paragraph 4 thereof
46-J-WP-5650-21 3/3
the relationship of the petitioner with Tukaram Thakur has been
disputed. This aspect has not been considered by the Scrutiny
Committee.
4. Be that as it may, we find that the petitioner is entitled to the
benefit of adjudication of his uncle claim in the light of the law as laid
down in Apoorva V. Nichale (supra). The uncle of the petitioner
having been found to be belonging to "Thakur" Schedule Tribe and in
absence of any aspect of fraud being alleged, there is no reason to
deprive the petitioner of benefit of such adjudication.
5. Hence for reasons contained in the judgment in Writ Petition
No.5251/2019 dated 26/07/2019 in case of the petitioner's uncle, the
order dated 02/11/2020 passed by the Scrutiny Committee is set aside.
It is declared that the petitioner belongs to "Thakur" Schedule Tribe.
The Scrutiny Committee shall within a period of four weeks from today
issue validity certificate to the petitioner.
Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms with no order as to
costs.
(M. W. Chandwani, J.) (A. S. Chandurkar, J.)
Digitally signed byASMITA
ADWAIT BHANDAKKAR Asmita
Signing Date:20.10.2022
18:40:37
