Bombay High Court
Vinay Parmeshwar Zariwad Through ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 5 September, 2023
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil, Shailesh P. Brahme
2023:BHC-AUG:19397-DB
1 wp 10729.23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 10729 OF 2023
1. Vinay Parmeshwar Zariwad,
Age : 22 years, Occu. : Education,
R/o Chikhli (I), Tq. Kinwat,
District Nanded
Through Power of attorney holder
Parmeshwar S/o Hushanna Zariwad,
Age : 50 Years, Occu. : Service,
R/o As above.
2. Vikas S/o Parmeshwar Zariwad,
Age : 18 years, Occu. : Education,
R/o Chikhli (I), Tq. Kinwat,
District Nanded. .. Petitioners
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,
Head Quarter at Aurangabad,
Through its Dy. Director (R),
Dist. Aurangabad. .. Respondents
Shri Sunil M. Vibhute, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Shri S. G. Sangle, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 05 SEPTEMBER 2023.
::: Uploaded on - 07/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 08/09/2023 01:37:28 :::
2 wp 10729.23
FINAL ORDER (Per Shailesh P. Brahme, J. ) :-
. Heard learned counsel for respective parties finally at the
admission stage.
2. The petitioners are challenging the judgment and order
dated 22.08.2023 passed by the respondent No. 2/Scrutiny
Committee invalidating the tribe certificates of the petitioners
for being 'Mannervarlu' (Scheduled Tribe) and confiscating the
same.
3. The petitioners are relying upon the validity certificates of
Namdev Linganna Zariwad and Saipranay Dattatraya Zariwad.
4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader supports the
impugned judgment and order. According to him the scrutiny
committee has rightly rejected the caste claims considering
manipulation of school record of Pandharinath, Poshetti,
Saraswatibai, Narendrakumar and Laxman, etc. The Scrutiny
Committee has rightly discarded the validity certificates which
are relied upon by the petitioners.
5. The learned A.G.P. submits that the school record of the
relatives of the petitioners is suspicious. It is further submitted
that the scrutiny committee has proposed reverification of the
validity certificates of the relatives of the petitioners. The
learned A. G. P. has placed on record the original files of the
petitioners and validity holder Namdev.
::: Uploaded on - 07/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 08/09/2023 01:37:28 :::
3 wp 10729.23
6. The petitioners have produced the genealogy, which is at
page No. 17 of the petition. The validity holders Tukaram and
Saipranay are paternal side blood relatives of the petitioner.
7. The petitioners have also placed on record the report of
vigilance enquiry in the matter of validity holder Namdev. It
reveals that due verification was made in respect of various
school entries. An entry of father of the petitioners of 1964,
which is said to be an adverse entry is also considered during the
enquiry. Thereafter, by reasoned order Namdev was issued with
the validity certificate. The original papers of Namdev disclose
the speaking order and consideration of the relevant record. We
find that the validity certificate was issued to Namdev after
following due procedure of law.
8. Both the learned counsel are ad-idem on the fact that
Namdev Linganna is wrongly described as Vitthal Lingaya
Zariwad in the impugned judgment at clause No. 3 of internal
page No. 17. The finding of the committee that validity
certificate was issued to Namdev only on the basis of validity
certificate of Ramesh is not correct.
9. The learned A. G. P. has drawn our attention to the
contrary entries of Saraswatibai, Suresh and Linganna from the
original papers. When there are already validity certificate of
Namdev and Saipranay issued in the family of the petitioners,
we cannot take any contrary view in the present matter. The
::: Uploaded on - 07/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 08/09/2023 01:37:28 :::
4 wp 10729.23
scrutiny committee has committed error of jurisdiction in
rejection the caste claims of the petitioners.
10. The objection of the learned A. G. P. for the inconsistent
genealogy, the contrary entries and manipulation in the school
record cannot be dealt with in the writ jurisdiction. It is open for
the scrutiny committee to look into this aspect of the matter
during the course of reverification. Unless the validity
certificates are revoked, the petitioners cannot be denied same
social status.
11. For the reasons stated above, we find that the petitioners
are entitled to validity certificates conditionally. We therefore
pass following order.
ORDER
A. The writ petition is partly allowed.
B. The impugned judgment and order dated 22.08.2023
passed by the respondent No. 2/Scrutiny Committee is
quashed and set aside.
C. The respondent No. 2/Scrutiny Committee shall issue tribe
validity certificates to the petitioners as belonging to
'Mannervarlu' (Scheduled Tribe) forth with.
D. The validity certificates shall be subject to the outcome of
5 wp 10729.23
the reverification undertaken by the Scrutiny Committee of
the validity certificates relied by the petitioners.
E. The petitioners shall not claim any equities.
F. The writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as
to costs.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]
bsb/Sept. 23
