Bombay High Court
Subhash Krushnarao Khartadkar vs The Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny ... on 21 December, 2023
Author: Anuja Prabhudessai
Bench: Anuja Prabhudessai
2023:BHC-NAG:17679-DB
26.wp2725.2022.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 2725 OF 2022
Subhash Krushnarao Khartadkar
Aged about 60 years, Occ. Retired Teacher,
R/o. Sirso, Tq. Murtizpur, ... Petitioner
Dist. Amravati.
Versus
1. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati Division, Amravati.
2. The Tahsildar, Murtizapur,
Tq. Murtizapur, Dist. Akola
3. The Collector, Akola
2. The Head Master, Swami Vivekanand
Vidyayala, Sirso, Tq. Murtizapur, Dist. Akola ... Respondents
Mr. Anup Gilda, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms. S.S. Jachak, Addl. GP for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
Ms. Himani Kavi, Advocate h/f Ms. P.D. Rane, Amicus Curiae.
CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, AND
MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 21.12.2023.
JUDGMENT:
(PER: Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi, J)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of both the learned counsel for the parties.
PAGE 1 OF 4
26.wp2725.2022.odt
(2) The petitioner has challenged the order passed by
respondent No.1 - Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee,
invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner. The petitioner belongs to
'Thakur' caste and the certificate was issued to the petitioner on
27.05.1985. The Police Vigilance Cell of respondent No.1 - Committee
had conducted enquiry in relation to the caste claim of the petitioner
and submitted the report on 23.03.2016. The petitioner has placed on
record before the respondent No.1- Committee several documents in
support to his caste claim. After considering the documents filed on
record the Committee has invalidated the caste claim stating that all
the documents are of 'Thakur' caste but it is not mentioned as 'Thakur
Scheduled Tribe'. The pre-constitutional documents filed by the
petitioner reflects the caste of his blood relatives as 'Thakur'. Only on
the above said ground, documents are discarded. The another ground
was for area restriction. The Committee has rejected the claim of the
petitioner by observing that the petitioner had failed to prove that his
ancestors had migrated from areas which were dwelling place/habitat
area of Thakur Scheduled Tribe Community.
(3) Learned AGP opposed the petition stating that many
PAGE 2 OF 4
26.wp2725.2022.odt
people took the advantage of the surname 'Thakur', though they are
not belonging to 'Thakur Scheduled Tribe', therefore, the Scrutiny
Committee has rightly observed that though the documents are of
'Thakur' community, none of the documents shows that it is of 'Thakur
Scheduled Tribe' and area restriction is also there.
(4) Heard Mr. Gilda, learned counsel for petitioner and
Ms. Jachak, learned AGP for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
(5) The rejection of the caste claim of the petitioner by
respondent No.1 - Committee on the ground of area restriction is
contrary to the principle law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
and by this Court. The Committee has not denied about the
documents of 'Thakur' caste only because the 'Scheduled Tribe' is not
mentioned the caste claim is rejected. The claim is also rejected on the
affinity test, the Hon'ble Apex Court has clearly stated about the
affinity test is not a litmust test in case of Maharashtra Adivasi Thakur
Jamat Seva Mandal and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., 2006
(4) Mh.LJ 521.
(6) In view of the above said reasons, the petitioner is
PAGE 3 OF 4
26.wp2725.2022.odt
entitled for the validity certificate of 'Thakur' caste. The petition is
allowed. The order passed by the Scrutiny Committee dated
10.05.2022 is set aside. Direction is given to the Scrutiny Committee
to issue validity certificate of caste 'Thakur' to the petitioner within a
period of six weeks.
(7) The petition is allowed in the above terms.
[MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.] [SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI J.]
Prity
Signed by: Mrs. Prity Gabhane PAGE 4 OF 4
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 04/01/2024 18:40:13
