Bombay High Court
Yash Manoj Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra Through The ... on 22 August, 2024
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2024:BHC-AUG:19039-DB
1 WP 7908.24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 7908 OF 2024
Yash Manoj Patil .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents
Shri Harshal P. Randhir, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Shri V. M. Chate, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 22 AUGUST, 2024.
FINAL ORDER (Per Shailesh P. Brahme, J.) :-
. Heard both sides finally considering urgency in the matter.
2. Petitioner is assailing judgment and order dated 02 July
2024 passed by the respondent No. 2/Scrutiny Committee
invalidating tribe certificate of the petitioner of 'Rajput Bhamta'
VJ-A category. The petitioner seeks reliance on the validity
certificate issued to his real sister Yogeshwari and paternal side
relative Premsing. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the Committee on earlier occasion had considered relevant
record in the case of his sister and Premsing and on the ground
of parity he is entitled to receive validity certificate.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader tenders on record
2 WP 7908.24
the original papers. He supports impugned judgment and order.
He would submit that Yogeshwari was issued with the validity
certificate on the basis of validity given to one Premsing
Nandansing Patil. The relationship between Premsing and
Yogeshwari has not been established. The Committee has rightly
discarded validity certificates of Yogeshwari and Premsing. The
genealogy which is filed in the present matter also does not show
name of Premsing. It is further contended that, even Yogeshwari
secured validity certificate merely on the basis of validity of
Premsing. No other material was placed on record to support the
claim. According to the learned A. G. P. the Committee has
taken plausible and reasonable view of the matter and no
interference is called for.
4. We have considered rival submissions of the parties and
also gone through the original papers, which are tendered on
record. The genealogy which is placed on record indicates that
real sister of the petitioner Yogeshari was issued with the
validity certificate. Premsing Nandansing Patil is also shown in
the genealogy. This genealogy was given by the petitioner's
father in Yogeshwari's matter. Yogeshwari was issued with the
validity certificate by a speaking order passed on 18.11.2021 by
the Scrutiny Committee at Jalgaon. When the present scrutiny
committee was dealing with the matter, the record of Yogeshwari
could have been verified. It was available with the same
committee. However, no endeavour has been made to consider
record of Yogeshwari.
3 WP 7908.24
5. In the impugned judgment, the Committee has entertained
a doubt about the relationship of Yogeshwari with the earlier
validity holder-Premsing. However, it is evident from the papers
of Yogeshwari's matter that there was affidavit given by
Premsing stating genealogy and his relationship with
Yogeshwari. There was affidavit of petitioner's father to indicate
relationship between Premsing and Yogeshwari. Without
conducting appropriate scrutiny, the findings have been recorded
in paragraph No. 11 and 12 of the impugned judgment. We are of
the considered view that those are unsustainable.
6. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the
matter Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs.
State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2023 SCC Online SC
326, both the validity certificates were issued in accordance with
law and would enure to the benefit of the petitioner. Both the
validity certificates are intact.
7. We also find that the Committee has recorded in paragraph
No. 6 of the impugned judgment that the Committee has no
jurisdiction to review earlier validities of Yogeshwari and
Premsing. If this is the approach of the Committee, then we find
that the petitioner is entitled to validity certificate without there
being any condition. Under these circumstances, it is desirable
to allow the present writ petition by directing the committee to
issue validity certificate to the petitioner. We, therefore, pass
4 WP 7908.24
following order :
ORDER
(a) The writ petition is allowed.
(b) The impugned judgment and order dated 02.07.2024
passed by the respondent No. 2/Scrutiny Committee is quashed
and set aside.
(c) The respondent No. 2/Scrutiny Committee shall issue tribe
validity certificate to the petitioner forthwith of 'Rajput Bhamta'
VJ-A category in prescribed proforma without adding any
condition.
(d) The writ petition is disposed of.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]
bsb/Aug. 24
