Bombay High Court
Ajinkya Sahebrao Nikam Through ... vs Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny ... on 7 August, 2024
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2024:BHC-AUG:17354-DB
946 and 948.WP.7975.24.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
946 WRIT PETITION NO.7975 OF 2024
Karan s/o Sahebrao Nikam ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee,
Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar,
Dist. Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar,
through its Member Secretary ... RESPONDENT
AND
948 WRIT PETITION NO.7987 OF 2024
Ajinkya s/o Sahebrao Nikam
through natural guardian i.e. father
Sahebrao Sheshrao Nikam ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee,
Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar,
Dist. Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar,
through its Member Secretary ... RESPONDENT
...
Advocate for petitioner/s : Mr. Sagar S. Phatale
AGP for Respondent/State in WP/7975/2024 : Mr. N.D. Batule
AGP for respondent/State in WP/7987/2024 : Mrs. S.S. Joshi
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 07.08.2024
ORDER ( PER : MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) :
By way of these two separate writ petitions, the petitioners
who are brothers, inter se, are challenging the separate orders of the
946 and 948.WP.7975.24.odt
scrutiny committee invalidating their individual 'Thakur' scheduled tribe
claims and directing confiscation and cancellation of the certificates.
2. Considering the urgency being demonstrated for securing
admission through the current admission process, both the matters are
taken up for final decision simultaneously at admission stage.
3. Since the petitioners are the brothers and have been relying
upon the same set of evidence and the earlier validities, we are disposing
of both these petitions by this common order.
4. Admittedly, as can be seen from the impugned judgments
itself, there are number of validities in the family some of which have
been issued pursuant to the orders of this Court.
5. Even if the Committee has endeavored to demonstrate the
manner in which the earlier validities were issued and has drawn
inference about all the validity holders having obtained the validities by
resorting to fraud, such inference will have to be substantiated by
undertaking due process of law. We do not intend to comment on the
sustainability of such inference drawn by the Committee regarding fraud.
Admittedly, Krishna Gangadhar Nikam is the first validity holder who was
issued with certificate of validity pursuant to the order passed by the
Commissioner of Tribal Development, Nashik in Caste Appeal Case
No.6/1991 by the order dated 02.08.1991, who was the then the
appellate authority. Incidentally, Krishna's another sister Kanchan had
also faced similar invalidation. On her behalf their father Gangadhar had
946 and 948.WP.7975.24.odt
filed Writ Petition No.3082/1995. A division bench of this Court by the
order dated 10.07.1995 directed a certificate of validity to be issued to
Kanchan.
6. The Committee in the impugned order has not examined the
validities independently, the manner in which those were issued and has
merely commented upon some other validities.
7. It is also a matter of record that though the earlier validity
holders had received blanket validities, in some matters, this Court has
directed certificates of validities to be issued to the petitioners' relatives
subject to the final outcome of the matters which the Committee had
decided to reopen. The learned advocate for the petitioners would point
out that as mentioned in the impugned order passed in the matter of
Ajinkya, committee has expressed its intention to file a review petition or
Special Leave Petition in respect of the orders passed in the matter of
petitioners' validity holders Saurabh Ashok Nikam and Shubham Ashok
Nikam as also Nana Goraknath Nikam. He would, therefore, submit that
subject to the final outcome of such SLPs or review petitions to be
preferred, the petitioners may be granted certificates of validity. They are
ready to face the consequences as laid down in the matter of Shweta
Balaji Isankar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.;WP No.6320/2017.
8. Obviously, in the light of the aforementioned facts, wherein,
the blood relatives of the petitioners have been issued with certificates of
validity by the orders of this Court, the petitioners cannot be deprived of
946 and 948.WP.7975.24.odt
having a similar benefit.
9. The writ petitions are partly allowed. The impugned orders
are quashed and set aside. The Committee shall immediately issue
certificates of validity to the petitioners of 'Thakur' scheduled tribe. Its
validity would be subject to the final outcome of the SLPs or review
petitions in the matter of Saurabh Ashok Nikam, Shubham Ashok Nikam
and Nana Gorakhnath Nikam.
10. The petitioners shall not be entitled to claim equities.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ]
JUDGE JUDGE
habeeb
