Bombay High Court
Pooja Macchindra Pattewad And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 8 September, 2023
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil, Shailesh P. Brahme
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 4333 OF 2022
SHREENATH RAMAKANT PATTEWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 4352 OF 2022
PRIYANKA RAMAKANT PATTEWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 5614 OF 2022
1. POOJA MACCHINDRA PATTEWAD
2. PRITI MACCHINDRA PATTEWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 5808 OF 2023
PRITAM KASHINATH PATTEWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
...
Advocate for Petitioners in WP/4333/22 & 4352/22 : Mr. O.B. Boinwad
Advocate for Petitioners in WP/5614/22 & 5808/23 : Mr. S.M. Vibhute
AGP for Respondent/s - State : Mr. A.S. Shinde
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
Reserved on : 04 SEPTEMBER 2023
Pronounced on : 08 SEPTEMBER 2023
PER COURT ( PER : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J) :
1. Heard learned counsel for the respective sides finally at the
admission stage.
::: Uploaded on - 08/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2023 12:33:49 :::
2
2. All the petitioners are related inter se. They were issued
tribe certificates for 'Koli Mahadev' scheduled tribe. By common
judgment and order dated 14.02.2022, their tribe certificates were
invalidated. There is common record. Hence, we are considering all the
matters together. For the sake of convenience, we are referring Writ
Petition No. 4352 of 2022 that of Priyanka.
3. The petitioners are relying upon validity certificate issued to
Ramakant, Suryakant, Gunwanti. The petitioners have produced the
genealogy in their respective mattes to show their relationship with
Ramakant. According to them, the validity certificate of Ramakant is
reliable and it would enure to their benefits. Due procedure of law was
followed by the Scrutiny Committee in his matter.
4. Learned AGP supports impugned judgment and order.
According to him, the Scrutiny Committee is justified in rejecting the
tribe claim because there were contrary entries in the school record of
Daivshala, Padmin, Meena, Pandhari, Naganth. The census record of
1951 indicates the caste of the relatives of the petitioners as 'Koli'. It is
further submitted that the manipulation in the school record was noticed
in case of Vasant, Vishwanath and Laxman.
5. Learned AGP would further submit that the validity
certificate of Ramakant was procured by suppression of material facts. It
was based upon the false information pertaining to the relatives of the
::: Uploaded on - 08/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2023 12:33:49 :::
3
petitioners. The validity certificate of another validity holder Ranjana
Nagnath Pattewar was also found to be unreliable. It is informed by
learned AGP that the Scrutiny Committee has proposed re-verification of
the validity holders. He has produced original papers of the petitioners.
6. We have considered submissions advanced by learned
counsel of both the sides. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn
our attention to the vigilance enquiry report in case of Ramakant which
is at page no. 48. There is no dispute of relationship of Ramakant with
the petitioners. The relevant documentary evidence was verified. By
reasoned order, Ramakant was issued with the validity certificate. We
are of the view that it was issued after following due procedure of law.
7. To substantiate the claim, the petitioner has produced on
record common judgment and order dated 26.07.2023, passed by our
bench in Writ Petition No. 8226 of 2020 in the matter of Anjali
Laxmanrao Pattewar Versus State of Maharashtra with another Writ
Petition. The petitioners in that case are stated to be the blood relatives
of the present petitioners. Our attention was drawn to paragraph no. 5
and 9 of the judgment. There is a reference of the validity holder
Ramakant Vasant Pattewar upon whom reliance is sought for in the
present matters. Relying upon validity certificates of Ramakant and
Ranjana, the directions were given to issue validity certificate subject to
certain condition. We have no hesitation in following the same course in
the present matters also.
::: Uploaded on - 08/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2023 12:33:49 :::
4
8. Learned AGP has drawn our attention to the photocopies of
the school record of Vasant, Suryakant and Vishwanath, to show that
there was a manipulation. However, we are not impressed by the
submissions of learned AGP because self same record was earlier
considered and validity certificate was given to Ramakant.
9. It is settled position of law that the successive Scrutiny
Committee cannot sit over in Appeal in respect of the same record and
validity certificates. In that view of the matter, the Scrutiny Committee
has committed jurisdictional error in rejecting the caste claim of the
petitioners. The objections of learned AGP in respect of contrary entries
indicating caste as 'Koli', the doubtful genology and the genuineness of
earlier validity certificates can be gone into by the Scrutiny Committee
during re-verification. As re-verification is under way, we do not prefer
to make any comments on the submissions of learned AGP, at this
juncture.
10. The Scrutiny Committee has recorded a finding against the
petitioners on the basis of census record of 1951. As per Section 15 of
Census Act, the record is inadmissible. We, therefore, do not approve
the finding of the Committee recorded in this regard.
11. We are of the considered view that the impugned judgment
and order is unsustainable. We, therefore, dispose of Writ Petitions by
passing following order :
::: Uploaded on - 08/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2023 12:33:49 :::
5
ORDER
i. The Writ Petitions are partly allowed.
ii. The common impugned judgment and order dated
14.02.2022, passed by the Scrutiny Committee, is quashed
and set aside.
iii. The Committee shall immediately issue tribe validity
certificates to the petitioners as belonging to 'Koli Mahadev'
scheduled tribe, which shall be subject to the decision to be
taken by the Committee in the matters which it intends to
reopen in respect of the validity holders.
iv. The certificates of validity shall be issued in the
prescribed format without incorporating other
conditions/additions.
v. The petitioners shall not be entitled to claim equities.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]
spc/
