Bombay High Court
Rutuja Yogesh Shinde vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 13 September, 2023
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil, Shailesh P. Brahme
2023:BHC-AUG:20037-DB
1 959.WP-598-2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Writ Petition No. 598 / 2023
Rutuja d/o Yogesh Shinde ...Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division,
through its Member Secretary
Aurangabad. ...Respondents
___
Mr. Yeramwar Sushant C., Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. S. G. Sangale, AGP for respondents/State.
___
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 13 SEPTEMBER 2023.
FINAL ORDER [SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] :
. Heard both the sides finally.
1. The petitioner is challenging the judgment and order dated
15.09.2022 passed by the respondent no.2/Scrutiny Committee,
invalidating her tribe claim as belonging to Thakur scheduled tribe
and confiscating the same. She is relying upon the orders of High
Court in the matters of Vinay and Tejaswini, who are her paternal
side relatives. Besides that she is also relying upon validity
certificates of other relatives.
::: Uploaded on - 15/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/09/2023 00:17:47 :::
2 959.WP-598-2023.doc
2. The learned AGP supports the impugned judgment and order.
According to him, the Scrutiny Committee has rightly rejected the
tribe claim of the petitioner because the school record was not
compatible with the tribe claim. The revenue record does not
indicate any resemblance of scheduled tribe Thakur. The petitioner
has relied upon the record in which only Thakur is mentioned which
is not a scheduled tribe. He would submit that the Scrutiny
Committee is justified in discarding the validity certificates because
they were procured by suppression of material facts.
3. The learned AGP has informed that the Scrutiny Committee has
proposed re-verification of the validity holders. In the alternative,
learned AGP would insist to issue validity certificate conditionally
only.
4. We have considered the submissions of the learned Counsels
for the parties. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has shown us
the genealogy which is at page no.35. There is no dispute about the
relationship of the persons appearing in the genealogy. It is pointed
out that there are near about 16 validity holders in the family of the
petitioner. Out of them, validity certificates of Tejaswini and Vinay
are issued in pursuance of the orders passed by the High Court.
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention
to the order of the High Court passed in the matter of Tejaswini
Rajesh Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra in Writ Petition No.
8842/2018. The High Court has considered the relevant record and
Tejaswini was directed to be issued validity of certificate without
::: Uploaded on - 15/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/09/2023 00:17:47 :::
3 959.WP-598-2023.doc
incorporating any conditions. We are of the considered view that it
should enure to the benefit of the petitioner.
6. The learned Counsel has pointed out the order passed by the
High Court in the matter of Vinay Rajendra Shinde Vs. State of
Maharashtra and Others in Writ Petition No.7627/2018. The text of
the said order is available at Exhibit-I. A threadbare analysis of the
record is made by the High Court. The writ petition was allowed and
Vinay was directed to be issued validity of certificate on certain
conditions.
7. We find that the validity certificates which are pressed into
service by the petitioner are reliable. Unless the validity certificates
are revoked, the petitioner cannot be deprived of the social status.
We find that the petitioner is entitled to the validity certificate
without incorporating any condition.
8. When selfsame record is already considered earlier on number
of occasions by the Scrutiny Committee and especially by the High
Court in the matters of Vinay and Tejaswini, we find that the Scrutiny
Committee committed an error of jurisdiction in arriving at a contrary
conclusion on the record which is already assessed.
9. The learned AGP would insist for issuing validity certificates on
certain conditions. However, the validity certificate was issued to
Tejaswini without incorporating any conditions. We do not find any
reason to impose any condition. The Scrutiny Committee has
::: Uploaded on - 15/09/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/09/2023 00:17:47 :::
4 959.WP-598-2023.doc
committed perversity in rejecting the caste claim under these
circumstances.
10. We hold that the impugned judgment and order is
unsustainable. We, therefore, pass the following order.
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and order dated 15.09.2022 passed by
the Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside.
(iii) The Scrutiny Committee shall issue tribe validity certificate of
'Thakur' scheduled tribe to the petitioner forthwith.
[SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] [MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]
NAJEEB/..
