Bombay High Court
Aakanksha Ramchandra Malshetwar vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 5 July, 2023
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil, Shailesh P. Brahme
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.5213 OF 2022
Aakanksha d/o Ramchandra Malshetwar,
Age 25 years, Occupation Education,
R/o Hatral, Tq. Mukhed, Dist.Nanded. ...Petitioner
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
Medical Education and Drugs Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Verification Committee Kinwat,
Through its Dy. Director ®,
At Aurangabad.
3. The Dean
Dr. Shankarrao Chavan
Government Medical College
Nanded, Dist. Nanded.
4. The Registrar,
Maharashtra University of Health
Sciences, Dindori Road, Mhasrul/
Nashik, District Nashik. ...Respondents
.....
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S. M. Vibhute
AGP for Respondents No.1 and 2 : Mr. S. K. Tambe
.....
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 05/07/2023.
JUDGMENT : ( Per SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.)
2 WP 5213-2022
Heard the learned Advocates for the parties and with their
consent the petition is taken up for final hearing.
2. The petitioner is challenging the Judgment and order dated
24/03/2022, passed by the respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee,
invalidating claim of Mannervarlu. She has placed on record the
caste validity certificates of her close relatives, Judgment and order
passed in Writ Petition No.2225 of 1993 in case of Arti d/o
Vyankatrao Malshetwar Vs. The State of Maharashtra, decided on
18/08/1993, the affidavits and the genealogy.
3. The Scrutiny Committee non-suited the petitioner on the
ground that there were contra entries in the vigilance inquiry the
relatives were found to be belonging to 'Munnarwar', the school/
revenue record was not consistent with the claim, the place of
residence of the petitioner and her forefathers was not compatible
with her claim, and that affinity test was against her. The Scrutiny
Committee discarded the validity certificates of the close relatives on
the ground that those were obtained by suppressing material facts,
were issued without following due procedure of law, the relationship
was in dispute and the contra entries were not disclosed while
seeking validation of their certificates.
3 WP 5213-2022
4. The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the real
sister of the petitioner Arti was issued with a validity certificate
pursuant to the Judgment and order passed by the Division Bench,
in Writ Petition No.2225 of 1993. The contrary entry upon which the
respondent Committee is harping is already considered by the
Division Bench. He would further submit that there were validity
certificates issued in favour of the close relatives namely Sarika,
Rukmin, Godawaribai, Jamuna, Tukaram. The genealogy is placed
on record, which is at page No.26. The relations of the validity
holder with the petitioners are not disputed. It is further submitted
that the Committee ought to have relied upon the validity
certificates of the relatives in view of law laid down by the Supreme
Court in the matter of Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat
Swarakshan Samiti vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors., reported
in 2023 (2) Mh.L.J. 785.
5. The learned AGP opposes the claim of the petitioner on the
ground that the report of the Vigilance Committee recorded that the
tribe 'Munnarwar' was shown in record of the blood relatives of the
petitioner. There is interpolation in the school record of Vyankat
Tukaram Malsetwar, which is very serious and amounts to fraud. It
is also pointed out that the record of Panchfula shows tampering.
4 WP 5213-2022
Lastly it is submitted that the validity certificates which are relied
upon by the petitioner were not secured by following due procedure
of law. There was suppression of material facts. The impugned
Judgment therefore needs to be confirmed. The learned AGP places
reliance upon the original record.
6. We have considered the rival submissions of the learned
Advocates and perused the record produced by the Scrutiny
Committee. The real sister of the petitioner Arti was issued with
validity certificate pursuant to the Judgment and order dated
18/08/1993, passed by Division Bench in Writ Petition No.2225 of
1993. In paragraph No.3 of the Judgment, the Division Bench
considered the contra entry in the school record of the father. It
reveals that the adverse school record and revenue record was
considered in the matter of Arti. In case of Arti there is nothing on
the record to show that due proedure was not followed before
issuing validity certificate. In that view of the matter there is no
room for us to discard validity certificate of Arti. It is pertinent to
note that the Scrutiny Committee did not record any adverse finding
against validity certificate of Arti except saying that the validity
certificate was obtained by supressing material facts.
7. We also find that there are validaty certificates issued in favour
5 WP 5213-2022
of blood relatives of the petitioner. Unless the Scrutiny Committee
reopens their matters, we are bound to accept the evidence.
8. We also put up a query to the learned AGP in respect of any
proposal to reopen the matters of validity holders. He submits that
no steps have been taken by the Committee for reopening of any of
the matters. We are of the considered opinion that the present case
is covered by law laid down in paragraphs No.20 to 24 of the
Supreme Court in the case of Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat
Swarakshan Samiti (Supra).
9. We, therefore, allow the present writ petition partly in the
following terms :-
1) The Judgment and order dated 24/03/2022,
passed by respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee, is
hereby quashed and set aside.
2) The respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee shall
issue validity certificate to the petitioner within a period
of two weeks.
3) There shall be no order as to costs.
( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ) ( MANGESH S. PATIL, J. )
vjg/-
