Bombay High Court
Pratik S/O Prakash Bayaskar vs The Vice-Chairman/Member-Secretary, ... on 16 August, 2024
Author: Nitin W. Sambre
Bench: Nitin W. Sambre
2024:BHC-NAG:9174-DB
-- 1 -- Judgment WP 1206.2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 1206 OF 2024
Pratik S/o Prakash Bayaskar
Aged about 21 yrs, Occ. Student,
R/o At-Post-Rajanda, Tah.Barshitakli .. Petitioner
Distt. Akola - 444006
Versus
The Vice-Chairman/Member -
Secretary Scheduled Tribe Caste .. Respondent
Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Amravati
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Preeti Rane, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms. N.P.Mehta, Additional Government Pleader for respondent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE AND
ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATED : AUGUST 16, 2024
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : Nitin W. Sambre, J.)
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
(2) The Sub Divisional Officer, Murtizapur, District - Akola,
issued a caste certificate dated 01/01/2018 in favour of the petitioner
of his belonging to "Thakur" (Scheduled Tribe). Since the petitioner
was a student of Jawahar Navoday Vidyalaya, Babhulgaon, District -
Akola, the Principal of the said School referred his tribe claim to the
respondent Committee for verification. The claim of the petitioner
PAGE 1 OF 4
-- 2 -- Judgment WP 1206.2024.odt
came to be rejected by the respondent Committee vide impugned order
dated 29/12/2023. As a sequel of above, the present petition is filed.
(3) The contentions of Ms.Rane, learned Counsel for the
petitioner are that the documents, which are produced in support of the
claim of the petitioner, speak of "Thakur" (Scheduled Tribe). Our
attention is invited to the tribe entries in the documents of relatives of
the petitioner, namely, Pralhad Laxman Bayaskar, Yashoda Laxman
Bayaskar, Vitthal Laxman, Sadashiv Laxman Bayaskar and Laxman
Mahadu Thakur. Based on the entries, which are of pre-Constitutional
era, it is claimed that the petitioner has established his tribe claim as
the said evidence has more probative value. In addition, it is claimed
that rejection of validity is based on failure of the petitioner to give
explanation in regard to some documents pertaining to Mahadu
Shravan Thakur of 06/08/1919 and other entries at Sr.Nos.23 to 26
mentioned in paragraph (2) of the impugned order, in which no caste is
recorded.
(4) As against above, Ms.Mehta, learned Additional
Government Pleader for the respondent, has opposed the tribe claim of
the petitioner stating that the documents relied on by the petitioner of
his great-grandfather, namely, Laxman Mahadu Thakur are dealt with.
It is claimed that since the original record of Laxman Mahadu Thakur
was lost in fire, sanctity of his documents was unable to be verified. It
PAGE 2 OF 4
-- 3 -- Judgment WP 1206.2024.odt
is further claimed that the entries in relation to daughter shown to have
been born to Mahadu Shravan Thakur in 1919 were not explained by
the father of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the tribe claim
of the petitioner is also rejected on the ground that he has failed to
satisfy the affinity test.
(5) We have considered the rival claims.
(6) It appears that leave apart the documents of 1935 or
1927 in relation to Laxman Mahadu Thakur, which are produced at
Sr.No.19 and 20 respectively, the document at Sr.No.21 of Mahadu
Shravan Thakur and other documents in relation to father and
grandfather of the petitioner, which are produced at Sr.Nos.22 to 26,
rest of the documents of 1932 onwards in relation to grandfather,
cousin grandfather and paternal aunt of the petitioner in categorical
terms establish that the "Thakur" entry was recorded in their School
Leaving Certificates. Since these entries are of pre-Constitutional era,
they have more probative value. Even if the entries in relation to
Laxman Mahadu Thakur and Mahadu Shravan Tahkur of 1935, 1927
and 1919 are ignored in view of the objections raised by the
Committee, still the pre-Constitutional era documents of 1932
categorically speak of caste "Thakur" entered into the School record of
the grandfather and thereafter father of the petitioner. In this
background, based on the documents, which were produced by the
PAGE 3 OF 4
-- 4 -- Judgment WP 1206.2024.odt
petitioner in support of his tribe claim, it has to be recorded that the
petitioner has established that he belongs to "Thakur" (Scheduled
Tribe).
(7) Another reason for invalidating the tribe claim of the
petitioner is that the petitioner is not able to clear affinity test. The
Apex Court has already ruled that the affinity test cannot be termed as
a litmus test, which can isolatedly form basis for rejection of the tribe
claim.
(8) In this background, having regard to the fact that the
petitioner has established his tribe claim of belonging to "Thakur"
(Scheduled Tribe), on the basis of the pre-Constitutional era documents
in relation to his blood relatives, the impugned order, in our opinion, is
not sustainable. That being so, the impugned order dated 29/12/2023
is hereby quashed and set aside. We direct the respondent to issue a
validity certificate in favour of the petitioner of his belonging to
"Thakur" (Scheduled Tribe) within a period of two weeks from the date
of production of this Judgment.
(9) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to
costs.
[ ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. ] [ NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. ]
KOLHE
Signed by: Mr. Ravikant Kolhe PAGE 4 OF 4
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 20/08/2024 11:07:53
