Bombay High Court
Ankita Manoj Akole vs Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny ... on 13 August, 2024
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2024:BHC-AUG:18159-DB
1 wp 8381.24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 8381 OF 2024
Ankita Manoj Akole .. Petitioner
Versus
Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee through its Member
Secretary .. Respondent
Shri Mahesh S. Deshmukh, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Shri A. R. Kale, Addl.G.P. for the Respondent.
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 8388 OF 2024
Pranay Suresh Akole and another .. Petitioners
Versus
Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee through its Member
Secretary .. Respondent
Shri Mahesh S. Deshmukh, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Shri N. D. Batule, A.G.P. for the Respondent.
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 13 AUGUST 2024.
FINAL ORDER (Per Shailesh P. Brahme, J.) :-
. Heard both the sides finally considering urgency in the
matter. Both the petitions are directed against invalidation of
the tribe certificates of the petitioners by distinct judgments and
2 wp 8381.24
orders passed on 01.08.2024 by the respondent/Scrutiny
Committee. The petitioners are blood relatives and they are
relying upon same record, hence we are considering both the
petitions together.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner
- Ankita is relying on validity certificate of her father Manoj. In
another petition petitioners Shruti and Pranay, who are siblings,
are relying upon validity certificate of their father Suresh.
Petitioner - Ankita's real sister Antara was issued with the
validity certificate by the High Court. He would further rely on
validity certificate of Nisha Rajendra Akole issued by the High
Court.
3. The learned Assistant Government Pleaders support
impugned judgments and orders. They would submit that
Committee has taken plausible and reasonable view. The tribe
claims are rejected as the validity certificates are found to be
unreliable and there was incompatible record.
4. We have considered submissions of the parties. The
genealogy has not been disputed by the respondent. Validity
holder Antara is real sister of petitioner Ankita. Validity holder
Suresh is the father of petitioner Shruti and Pranay in another
petition. It is noticed that self same record has already been
considered by the High Court as well as Scrutiny Committee in
granting validity certificates.
3 wp 8381.24
5. We have gone through common order of the coordinate
bench passed in the matter of Antara and Yash in Writ Petition
No. 13575 of 2021 and Writ Petition No. 13576 of 2021
respectively. There is no reason to discard the validity
certificates. Unless earlier validity certificates are revoked,
petitioners cannot be deprived of same social status.
6. The Committee has issued show cause notices to the
validity holders. It is likely to consume some time and the
petitioners cannot be made to wait till outcome of the
reverification. Petitioners are ready to run the risk of facing
consequences as laid down 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. We
find that the petitioners are entitled to receive validity
certificates conditionally. We, therefore, pass following order :
ORDER
A. The writ petitions are allowed partly.
B. The impugned judgments and orders dated 01.08.2024
passed by the respondent/Scrutiny Committee are quashed and
set aside.
C. The respondent/Scrutiny Committee shall issue validity
certificates of 'Mannervarlu' (Scheduled Tribe) to the petitioners
immediately, which shall be subject to outcome of reverification of
validity holders.
4 wp 8381.24
D. The petitioners shall not be entitled to claim equities.
F. The writ petitions are disposed of in above terms.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]
bsb/Aug. 24
