Bombay High Court
Shreya Ramchandra Musale And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 1 August, 2024
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2024:BHC-AUG:16677-DB
1 1004.WP-7781-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Writ Petition No. 7781 OF 2024
1. Shreya d/o Ramchandra Musale,
Age 19 years, Occu. Student,
2. Saurabh s/o Ramchandra Musale,
Age 21 years, Occu. Student,
Both R/o at Post Therban, Tq. Bhokar,
Dist. Nanded. ...Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Verification Committee, Kinwat,
Headquarter Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar,
Through its Deputy Director (Research)
and Member Secretary,
Near CIDCO Bus Stand, Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar, Dist. Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar. ...Respondents
___
Mr. Chandrakant R. Thorat, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. K.N. Lokhande, AGP for Respondents/State.
___
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ..
DATE : 1 AUGUST 2024
2 1004.WP-7781-2024.doc
FINAL ORDER [Per: Shailesh P. Brahme, J.] :
. Heard both the sides finally at the admission stage,
considering exigency in the matter.
2. The petitioners are siblings and they are challenging
judgment and order dated 09.07.2024 passed by the Scrutiny
Committee, confiscating and invalidating their tribe certificates
of Mannervarlu scheduled tribe. They seek to rely on validity
certificates of their father-Ramchandra, cousin uncle- Balaji.
Those certificates were issued after following due procedure of
law considering documentary evidence. Therefore, the
petitioners claim parity.
3. Learned AGP supports impugned judgment and order. He
would submit that there is suppression of invalidation of the
tribe certificate of Anil Vishwanath Musale who is blood relative
and therefore it would not be equitable to grant any relief to the
petitioners.
4. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties.
The father of the petitioners, Ramchandra and their cousin uncle
Balaji are the validity holders. Balaji Vitthal Musale was issued
with validity certificate on 03.12.2007 which is prior in time. We
have considered vigilance report prepared in his matter. It
reveals that the school record of his relatives were verified by
the Vigilance Cell. Amongst that, there was a record of Vitthal
Sambhaji Musale of the year 1958. It further reveals that Balaji
3 1004.WP-7781-2024.doc
was issued with validity certificate by Speaking Order
considering the documentary evidence. We are of the considered
view that the certificate of validity of Balaji was issued after
following due procedure of law. It was relied by the Committee
while issuing validity certificate to the father of the petitioners.
Both the validities would enure to the benefit of the petitioners.
5. The tribe certificate of Anil Vishwanath Musale was
invalidated by the Committee vide order dated 13.08.2002. It is
submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that order
of invalidation was ex-parte as Anil failed to prosecute his
matter. We have been taking a consistent view that invalidation
of a tribe certificate would not operate res judicata. When
selfsame record has already been scrutinized in the matter of
Balaji and Ramchandra who were issued validity certificates in
the year 2007 and 2008 respectively, invalidation of caste claim
of Anil would not affect petitioners claim.
6. Petitioners are ready to run the risk as per the judgment
rendered in the matter of Shweta Balaji Isankar Vs. the State of
Maharashtra and Others, in Writ Petition No.5611/2018. They
can be issued with validity certificates on certain conditions. We,
therefore, pass following order :
ORDER
a. The Writ Petition is allowed partly.
4 1004.WP-7781-2024.doc
b. The judgment and order dated 09.07.2024 passed
by the Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside.
c. The Scrutiny Committee shall issue tribe validity
certificates of 'Mannervarlu' Scheduled Tribe to the
petitioners forthwith. The same shall be subject to the
outcome of re-verification proposed by the Scrutiny
Committee.
d. The petitioners shall not be entitled to claim equities.
SHAILESH P. BRAHME MANGESH S. PATIL
JUDGE JUDGE
Najeeb..
