Bombay High Court
Varsharani Vasant Ghante vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 8 August, 2024
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2024:BHC-AUG:17369-DB
1 wp 7719.24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 7719 OF 2024
Varsharani Vasant Ghante .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents
Shri Pratp V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Shri V. M. Jaware, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 08 AUGUST, 2024.
FINAL ORDER :
. Heard both the sides finally.
2 Petitioner is challenging the order dated 31.05.2024 of
invalidation of her Koli Mahadev scheduled tribe certificate.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that
petitioner's father Vasant possesses certificate of validity, which
was issued after following due procedure of law. Vigilance
enquiry was conducted. Even pre-constitutional birth record of
petitioner's grandfather Revansiddha of 1340 Fasali was verified
and he was issued with certificate of validity by a reasoned order.
He would submit that though the Committee is not ready to
accept that validity so as to extend its benefit to the petitioner,
the Committee will have to undertake a scrutiny to recall that
validity and till that time the petitioner is entitled to have a
certificate of validity.
2 wp 7719.24
4. Learned advocate would also point out that even a
favourable school record of petitioner's grandfather of 1340 Fasali
was scrutinized not only at the time of father's claim, but even in
the petitioner's claim. The reasons assigned by the Committee to
discard it are not sustainable. The petitioner is ready to face the
consequences as contemplated in the matter of Shweta Balaji
Isankar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others
judgment dated 27 July 2018 in W. P. No. 5611 of 2018 and
petitioner may be issued with the certificate of validity. He
would also submit that apart from petitioner's father, there are
few other validities in the family.
5. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader would
submit that father had obtained certificate of validity by
practicing fraud. The genealogy prepared in the petitioner's
matter under his signature does not tally with the genealogy
furnished by him while obtaining certificate of validity. The
person whose validity he was banking upon namely Vidyadhan is
not traceable in the genealogy prepared in the petitioner's matter
by the vigilance officer.
6. He would submit that there are several contrary entries
wherein petitioner's family members have been described as Koli,
which has been included in OBC, but which subsequently has
been included in SBC. The learned A. G. P. would further submit
that Committee has noticed that school record of petitioner's
grandfather of 1340 Fasli was manipulated and word Mahadev
3 wp 7719.24
was inserted subsequently suffixing it to word Koli. The
committee has referred to various circumstances to substantiate
its inference about the validity holder having obtained validity by
practicing fraud and its intention to reopen the validity.
7. We have carefully considered rival submissions and
perused the papers including original files of petitioner as well as
her father Vasant. We have no sufficient and cogent reason to
discard the observations in the impugned order, whereby
difference has been pointed out in the genealogy prepared under
the signature of petitioner's father in the present matter and the
one submitted by him while claiming validity.
8. However, it is equally important to note that like it was in
the petitioner's father's matter, even in the present matter the
school record of petitioner's grandfather Ravansiddh was verified
by the vigilance officer, wherein while admitting in the school on
18.06.1947 his caste was described as Koli Mahadev. The
Committee at the time of scrutiny of Vasant's matter had
accepted this record as genuine one, but in the impugned order
the present Committee has opined that word Mahadev has been
suffixed subsequently in different ink. In order to verify such
inference, we have carefully gone through the coloured photo copy
available in the original file of the Committee in petitioner's case.
9. In our considered view, the manner in which words Koli
Mahadev appear in the requisite column does not substantiate
the inference being drawn by the Committee. We do not see any
4 wp 7719.24
difference in ink in the word Koli and that of Mahadev. Besides
going by the alignment in respect of caste recorded in the caste
column of preceding and succeeding entries clearly substantiate
our inference in as much as, it does not appear that word Koli
was written in the middle of the column and word Mahadev was
added subsequently. In fact, word Koli does not start aligning
with other caste name in preceeding and subsequent caste
column entries.
10. Besides, if the self same entry was accepted by the earlier
committee while considering claim of petitioner's father, it would
be unending process if the succeeding Committees keep on
drawing its own inferences in respect of self same record. We are
of the firm view that this record of 1340 Fasli (1930 AD) would
substantiate petitioner's claim of belonging to Koli Mahadev.
11. Irrespective of other circumstances being pointed out by the
Committee attributing petitioner's father of having practiced
fraud, this entry of pre-constitutional order would out weigh the
subsequent contrary record as laid down in the matter of Aanand
Dhananjay Nalawade Vs. The State of Maharashtra, 2014(4) Mh.L.J.
77.
12. Even if for the some reasons the Committee now intends to
undertake reverification of the validity issued to Vasant, we
cannot stop it in the present matter. Considering the fact that it
would be a long drawn process, we cannot make the petitioner
wait for final decision in the matter to be reopened.
5 wp 7719.24
13. In view of above state of affairs, the impugned order is
unsustainable. The petitioner deserves to be issued with the
validity certificate, subject to usual conditions. We, therefore,
pass following order :
ORDER
a. The writ petition is partly allowed.
b. Impugned order dated 31.05.2024 passed by the respondent
No. 2/Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside to the extent
of the petitioner.
c. The respondent No. 2/Scrutiny Committee shall
immediately issue certificate of validity to the petitioner of 'Koli
Mahadev' (Scheduled Tribe) in prescribed proforma G without
incorporating any conditions.
d. Certificate of validity would be subject to the outcome of
reverification to be undertaken by the Committee of the validity
holders.
e. Petitioner shall not be entitled to claim equities.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]
bsb/Aug. 24
