Bombay High Court
Shilpa Shivaji Yamalwad vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 13 August, 2024
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2024:BHC-AUG:17878-DB
1 WP / 11458 / 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 11458 OF 2019
Shilpa D/o Shivaji Yamalwad,
Age : 19 years, Occu. : Student,
R/o. At Post Ghungarala,
Tq. Naigaon Kh., Dist. Nanded .. Petitioner
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2] The Commissioner & Competent Authority,
Government of Maharashtra,
State Common Entrance Test Cell,
8th Floor, New Exclesior Building,
A.K. Nayak Marg, Fort,
Mumbai - 400 001
(Resp. no. 2 deleted as per Court's
Order Dated 19-09-2019)
3] Deputy Director (Research)
and Member Secretary,
Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Verification Committee,
Near Saint Lawrence High School,
Town Centre, CIDCO, Aurangabad
Dist. Aurangabad .. Respondents
...
Advocate for petitioner : Mr. Chandrakant R. Thorat
AGP for the respondent - State : Mr. V.M. Jaware
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 13 AUGUST 2024
ORAL ORDER (SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) :
Heard both the sides finally, considering the exigency in
the matter.
2 WP / 11458 / 2019
2. The petitioner is challenging the judgment and order dated
06-08-2019 passed by the scrutiny committee, confiscating and
invalidating her validity certificate. She relies on validity certificate of
her father - Shivaji, which according to her, was issued after following
the due procedure of law. Besides that, she is also relying upon the
pre-constitutional document disclosing caste as 'Mannervarlu'.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that validity
certificate of petitioner's father would enure to her benefit. The scrutiny
committee commited perversity in overlooking the clinching record of
Laxman Krushnaji. It is further contended that the finding regarding the
revenue record of Munjaji Bhoju, is perverse.
4. Per contra, learned AGP tenders on record the original
papers of the petitioner as well as her father. The learned AGP would
point out that tampering was noticed in the school record of the close
relatives of the petitioner. He would further submit that the validity
certificates are rightly discarded by the scrutiny committee because
there were suppression of material facts. He would further submit that
Laxman whose revenue record is relied upon by the petitioner is not
shown in the genealogy and is not a relative of the petitioner.
5. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties.
We have gone through the original papers which are on record.
3 WP / 11458 / 2019
6. It appears from the record that Sunita is the first validity
holder. Petitioner's father - Shivaji was also issued with validity
certificate relying upon validity of Chandrakala. The scrutiny committee
has not considered the validities issued to Sunita as well as
Chandrakala. It also reveals that vigilance enquiry was conducted in
petitioner's father's matter. He was issued with validity certificate by
the scrutiny committee by a reasoned order. During vigilance enquiry,
the pre-constitutional revenue record of Laxman Krishnaji was verified
and it was found to be genuine. It is revenue record of 1353 Fasli
(1942).
7. Surprisingly, the scrutiny committee did not consider the
revenue document of Laxman Krishnaji though it was part of the
vigilance enquiry of the petitioner's father and it is also reflected in the
order of the scrutiny committee in case of petitioner's father. This old
record would enure to the benefit of the petitioner considering the
greater probative value.
8. We are of the considered view that the validity certificate
issued to petitioner's father would corroborate her claim. It was issued
after following due procedure of law as contemplated by the judgment
of the Supreme Court in the matter of Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur
Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs. State of Maharashtra and others;
2023 SCC Online SC 326.
4 WP / 11458 / 2019
9. The scrutiny committee criticized the revenue entry of
Munjaji Bhoju holding it as contrary to the tribe claim of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention
to the same entry of Munjaji Bhoju which indicates caste as
'Mannervarlu'. The finding, therefore, recorded by the scrutiny
committee is perverse. It further reveals from the record that the
petitioner had submitted reply to the vigilance report disclosing Fasli
document of Laxman Krushnaji. Despite that, no endeavour has been
made by the committee to refer the document. Under these
circumstances, we find that the impugned judgment and order is
unsustainable.
10. Learned AGP would inform that the committee has issued
show cause notices to the earlier validity holders. The petitioner is
ready to run the risk in view of the law laid down in the matter of
Shweta Balaji Isankar Vs. State of Maharashtra and others (writ
petition no. 6320 of 2017). Petitioner deserves to be issued with
validity certificate conditionally.
11. We, therefore, pass the following order :
ORDER
I] Writ petition is allowed partly.
II] Impugned judgment and order is quashed and set aside.
5 WP / 11458 / 2019
III] The scrutiny committee shall issue tribe validity certificate
to the petitioner which shall be subject to the outcome of the re-
verification proposed by the committee.
IV] Petitioner shall not be entitled to claim equities.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ]
JUDGE JUDGE
arp/
