Sneha Prakash Ainlawar vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7024 Bom

                                      1                             wp 9353.21

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                      WRIT PETITION NO. 9353 OF 2021

          Kum. Sneha d/o Prakash Ainlawar,
          Age : 22 years, Occu. : Student,
          R/o Hingni, Post Badur,
          Taluka Biloli, District Nanded.              ..   Petitioners
                Versus
 1.       The State of Maharashtra,
          Through it's Secretary,
          Tribal Development Department,
          Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

 2.       The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
          Committee, Aurangabad Division,
          Aurangabad, through its Member
          Secretary.

 3.       The Sub Divisional Officer,
          Biloli, District Nanded.

 4.       Maharashtra University of Health
          Sciences, Nashik, through its
          Registrar.

 5.       Dr. Ulhas Patil Medical College
          And Hospital, Jalgaon-Bhusawal
          Road, Jalgaon (kh) 425 309,
          Through its Dean.                            ..   Respondents

 Shri A. S. Golegaonkar, Advocate i/by Shri M. A. Golegaonkarfor
 the Petitioner.
 Mrs. M. A. Deshpande, Addl.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

                           CORAM :    MANGESH S. PATIL AND
                                      SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
                               DATE : 14 JULY 2023.




::: Uploaded on - 15/07/2023                  ::: Downloaded on - 17/07/2023 06:26:21 :::
                                   2                               wp 9353.21

 FINAL ORDER (Per Shailesh P. Brahme, J.) :


 .        Heard both the sides.


 2.       The petitioner is assailing judgment and order dated
 12.07.2021 passed by the Scrutiny Committee invalidating her
 claim as belonging to 'Mannervarlu' (Scheduled Tribe).


 3.       The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
 the real brother of the petitioner namely Shubham is issued with
 the validity certificate.     All the record in the present case is
 already scrutinized in an enquiry of Shubham.               Besides that
 there is school record, affidavits, genealogy, report of enquiry
 committee to support the claim of the petitioner.


 4.       The learned Assistant Government Pleader supports the
 impugned judgment and order. According to him the Scrutiny
 Committee has rightly held that the record of the school entries
 of the relatives do not support the claim of the petitioner. There
 is inconsistency in the caste shown in the record of the relatives.
 A manipulation of the record was found in the case of Parshuram
 and Prakash. Considering the affinity test, Scrutiny Committee
 has rightly rejected the claim. As the Scrutiny Committee has
 reopened the validity certificates of the relatives of the
 petitioner, no reliance can be placed upon the validity certificate.


 5.       The petitioner has placed on record order dated 24 July




::: Uploaded on - 15/07/2023                ::: Downloaded on - 17/07/2023 06:26:21 :::
                                      3                                 wp 9353.21

 2018 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 7629 of 2018 in
 the case of Shubham Prakash Ainlawar Vs. Scheduled Tribe
 Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad. It is a matter of
 real brother of the petitioner. Considering contrary entries and
 other material on record the petition was allowed. He was issued
 with the validity certificate. As per the law laid down by the
 Supreme Court in the matter of Maharashtra Adivasi Thakur
 Jamat Swarakshak Samiti Vs. State of Maharashtra and others

 reported in 2023 (2) Mh. L. J. 785, we have to rely upon validity
 certificate of Shubham.


 6.       It is informed that the Scrutiny Committee has reopened
 the matters of validity holders connected with the petitioner.
 Subject to those proceedings, the committee can be directed to
 issue the validity certificate to the petitioner. We therefore pass
 following order.
                                    ORDER

A. The writ petition is partly allowed.

B. The judgment and order dated 12.07.2021 passed by the respondent/Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside.

B. The respondent/Scrutiny Committee shall issue tribe validity certificate to the petitioner as belonging to 'Mannervarlu' (Scheduled Tribe) within a period of two (02) weeks from today on following conditions :

(i) The validity certificate shall be subject to the outcome

4 wp 9353.21

of the scrutiny undertaken by the committee for re- verification.

(ii) The petitioner shall not claim equity and shall co- operate with the enquiry of reverification.

C. The writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]

bsb/July 23