Bombay High Court
Pooja Baburao Sudewad vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 7 November, 2023
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil, Neeraj P. Dhote
2023:BHC-AUG:24405-DB
1 WP11174.2021&Anr.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
WRIT PETITION NO. 11174 OF 2021
Pooja d/o Baburao Sudewad,
Age : 26 years, Occu. Education,
R/o. Mendka, 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, Aurangabad,
Through its Dy. Director (R),
Dist. Aurangabad. ....Respondents
.....
Mr. Sunil M. Vibhute - Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. S. G. Sangle - AGP for respondent nos. 1 and 2
Mr. Shrikant S. Patil - Advocate for respondent no. 3
..........
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11173 OF 2021
Bhagyashree d/o Baburao Sudewad,
Age : 26 years, Occu. Education,
R/o. Mendka, 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, Aurangabad,
Through its Dy. Director (R),
Dist. Aurangabad. ....Respondents
::: Uploaded on - 08/11/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2023 07:11:29 :::
2 WP11174.2021&Anr.odt
.....
Mr. Sunil M. Vibhute - Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. S. G. Sangle - AGP for respondent nos. 1 and 2
......
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL
AND
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.
DATED : 07 NOVEMBER 2023
COMMON JUDGMENT [Per : Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] : -
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with
the consent of the parties and taken up for final disposal at the stage
of admission. Perused the papers. As the impugned order dated
02.08.2021 passed by the respondent no. 2 - Scrutiny Committee is
the common order in both the petitions, both the petitions are
disposed of by this common Judgment.
2. The petitioners are the sisters pursuing their respective
education. Their claim towards 'Mannervarlu' Scheduled Tribe was
referred to the Scrutiny Committee. After directing vigilance inquiry,
the Scrutiny Committee passed the impugned order invalidating their
claims on the grounds that, in the documents of their near relatives,
the caste was mentioned by making additions/alterations, failure to
show the affinity and area restrictions.
::: Uploaded on - 08/11/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2023 07:11:29 :::
3 WP11174.2021&Anr.odt
3. It is submitted by learned advocates for the petitioners
that the real paternal uncle, real brother, cousin sister, cousin brother
of the petitioners are issued with the validity certificates by the
Committee by following due procedure of law. It is submitted that
the Committee erred in ignoring the said vital aspect and invalidated
the claim on the ground that there were corrections in the column of
caste in the documents of their near blood relatives. It is submitted
that, it is the settled position under the law that until the blood
relatives are holding the validity certificates, the claimants cannot be
deprived of the validity towards the tribe claim. He submitted that
the impugned order be set aside and the Scrutiny Committee be
directed to issue the validity certificates.
4. The learned AGP submitted that during the inquiry in the
tribe claim of the petitioners, it is revealed that there were
corrections in the caste column of the relatives of the petitioners and
in some documents which are relied by the petitioners, the tribe is
mentioned as 'Munurwar' and 'Munurwad' and, therefore, the
respondent no. 2 - Caste Scrutiny Committee has rightly invalidated
the tribe claims of the petitioners.
5. The record shows that certain entries of the caste of the
relatives/distant relatives of the petitioners are mentioned as
'Munurwar' and 'Munurwad' and according to the Scrutiny Committee,
::: Uploaded on - 08/11/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2023 07:11:29 :::
4 WP11174.2021&Anr.odt
'Lu' came to be added to the words 'Mannervar' to derive the benefits
of the said tribe claim. However, the fact remains that the near blood
relatives of the petitioners are issued with the validity certificate
towards 'Mannervarlu' Scheduled Tribe after following the due
process. The genealogy is not in dispute. There is merit in the
contention of the learned advocate for the petitioners that, till the
validity of blood relatives of the petitioners is intact, they cannot be
deprived of the validity. Therefore, in these factual aspects and in the
light of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
cases of Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs.
State of Maharashtra Ors. reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 326,
Palghat Jilla Thandan Samudhaya Samrakshna Samithi and
Another Vs. State of Kerala and Anr. reported in (1994) 1 SCC 359
and Jaywant Dilip Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
reported in 2018 (5) All MR 975, the impugned order is unsustainable
in the eye of law and needs to be quashed and set aside with the
directions to the Scrutiny Committee to issue the tribe validity
certificates to the Petitioners as belonging to 'Mannervarlu'
Scheduled Tribe subject to the final outcome of the matters which the
Committee has decided to re-open. Thus, we proceed to pass the
following order :
ORDER
[i] Writ Petitions are partly allowed.
5 WP11174.2021&Anr.odt
[ii] The Judgment and Order dated 02.08.2021 passed by the
respondent no. 2 - Scrutiny Committee, is quashed and
set aside.
[iii] The Scrutiny Committee shall issue tribe validity
certificate in favour of the Petitioners as 'Mannervarlu'
within a period of two weeks from today, which shall be
subject to the following conditions;
[a] the validity certificate shall be subject to the
outcome of the re-verification proposed to be
undertaken by the Scrutiny Committee.
[b] the petitioners shall not claim any equity.
6. Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order
as to costs.
[NEERAJ P. DHOTE] [MANGESH S. PATIL]
JUDGE JUDGE
SG Punde
