Bombay High Court
Vijay Uttam Boyane vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 14 August, 2024
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2024:BHC-AUG:18219-DB
1 PB-1 & 2.WP-8668-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 8668 OF 2024
VIJAY UTTAM BOYANE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ANOTHER
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 8675 OF 2024
AJAY UTTAM BOYANE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ANOTHER
...
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Jadhavar Pratap V.
AGP for Respondents/State : Mr. S.R. Yadav Lonikar
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 14 AUGUST 2024
PER COURT :
. Heard. Issue notice for final disposal to the respondents.
Learned AGP waives service for respondents in both the petitions.
Leave granted to correct the first name in Writ Petition
No.8675/2024.
2. At the joint request of the parties, considering the urgency
being demonstrated for taking admission in the current admission
process, the matters are heard finally today itself.
3. The learned advocate for the petitioners submits that by
separate orders, petitioners' tribe certificates of Koli Mahadev
scheduled tribe, have been confiscated and cancelled by the
impugned orders. He would submit that the petitioners' real sister -
2 PB-1 & 2.WP-8668-2024.doc
Jayshree was granted certificate of validity by following due process
of law. A vigilance inquiry was conducted. Father's school record of
1955was accepted and she was held to be entitled to have a
certificate of validity by passing a reasoned order. The petitioners are
entitled to derive the benefit of that validity. Even if the Committee
has now decided to reopen Jayshree's validity, till the time it is not
recalled, the petitioners cannot be deprived of having the benefit of
reservation. They are ready to run the risk as contemplated in
Shweta Balaji Isankar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others, in
Writ Petition No.5611/2018 and the certificates be issued to them.
4. Learned AGP opposes both the petitions. He submits that the
Committee has found sufficient reasons to refuse to extend the
benefit of Jayshree's validity. There is consistent contrary record
wherein petitioners' blood relatives have been described as 'Hindu
Koli'. All such contrary record was concealed by Jayshree while
obtaining the certificate of validity. Even in their reply to the
vigilance report conducted in the present matter, they have not
disputed being relatives of the individuals whose contrary record was
collected during vigilance inquiry and expressly referred to in the
impugned judgments and orders. He would, therefore, submit that
there are sufficient reasons for the Committee to take steps for
recalling validity of Jayshree and the process would be undertaken.
5. We have been made available the original file of Jayshree. A
vigilance inquiry was conducted. School record was collected, the
3 PB-1 & 2.WP-8668-2024.doc
oldest being that of father - Uttam of the year 1955, wherein he was
described as Koli Mahadev. Even the affinity test was applied. She
could get through it successfully. By a reasoned order she was
granted a certificate of validity. Since all the parameters
contemplated in the Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan
Samiti Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., 2023 SCC Online SC 326,
stand fulfilled. Irrespective of the decision of the Committee now to
reopen validity of Jayshree, the petitioners would be entitled to have
certificates of validity, more so when they are ready to face the
consequences contemplated in Shweta Balaji Isankar (supra).
6. Since Jayshree is not before us, we deem it appropriate not to
undertake any scrutiny of the circumstances which the Committee
has referred to form a view about she having practised fraud.
7. The writ petitions are partly allowed. The impugned orders
are quashed and set aside. The respondent/ Committee shall
immediately issue tribe validity certificates to the petitioners as
belonging to 'Koli Mahadev' scheduled tribe in the prescribed format
without adding anything. The validities shall be subject to the final
outcome of the matters which the Committee has decided to re-open.
8. The petitioners shall not be entitled to claim equities.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]
Najeeb..
