Bombay High Court
Gajanan Pandit Gavali vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 23 April, 2025
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2025:BHC-AUG:12916-DB
(1) wp 3556.25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 3556 OF 2025
Gajanan s/o Pandit Gavali,
Age: 36 years, Occ: Service (Junior Clerk)
R/o. At Post Wasangvi (Sundarwadi),
Tq. Bhokardan, Dist. Jalna. ...PETITIONER
V/s.
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through its Principal Secretary
Social Justice and Special Assistance Department,l
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
2. Commissioner of Social Welfare,
3, ChurchRoad, Social Welfare Commissionerate,
Pune, Tq. and Dist. Pune -1.
3. Divisional Assistant Commissioner,
Social Welfare Department,
Khokadpura, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.
4. Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Verification Committee,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.
Near Saint Lawrence School, CIDCO,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar,
Dist. Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.
Through its Deputy Director (Research)
and Member Secretary. ...RESPONDENTS
.....
Mr. C.R. Thorat, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. R.K. Ingole, AGP for the Respondent/State
.....
(2) wp 3556.25
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.
DATE : 23.04.2025
JUDGMENT :
- (Per: Y.G. Khobragade, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. At the joint request of
the parties the matter is being disposed of at the stage of admission.
2. By the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the petitioner prays for issuance of writ of mandamus to set aside the
impugned judgment and order passed by the respondent no.4-Scrutiny
Committee, Aurangabad, on 05.03.2025.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner takes us to the
genealogical tree of Shri Kaluba, the great-great grandfather of the
petitioner. Shri Kaluba was having two sons namely Shri Ranuba and Shri
Barku. Shri Ranuba was having four sons namely Motiram, Gangaram,
Mukunda and Hari, the great grandfather and cousin great grandfather of
the petitioner. Shri Gangaram was having two sons Pandit and Samadhan.
Shri Pandit had three sons namely Dnyaneshwar, Gajanan and Vishnu,
whereas Samadhan was having one son Akash. The petitioner is grandson of
Gajanan and son of Pandit. The second genealogical branch of Barku was
having two sons Totaram and Tulsiram. On 29.04.2020, the respondent
(3) wp 3556.25
no.4/scrutiny committee issued caste validity certificate in favour of Babu
Totaram Gawli, the cousin uncle of the petitioner. On 25.02.2022, the
coordinate bench of this Court passed an order in writ petition
No.1565/2020 (Shubham Baburao Gavali V/s. The State of Maharashtra &
Ors.) and granted validity certificate to Shubham Baburao Gavali of the Koli
Mahadev scheduled tribe. On 06.09.2011, the respondent no.4/scrutiny
committee issued Koli Mahadev scheduled tribe validity certificate in favour
of Balu Sheshrao Gavli, the paternal blood relative of the petitioner.
Therefore, it appears that there are as many caste validities in paternal blood
relatives of the petitioner of Koli Mahadev scheduled tribe.
4. Since there are number of validities in the family of the
petitioner, however, the respondent no.4 refused to validate petitioner's tribe
claim on the ground that, though the petitioner submitted caste validity
certificate of Sheshrao Balu Gavli, Babu Totaram Gavli, however, said
validities were obtained by concealing the facts, therefore, the petitioner is
not entitled to validation. However, the fact remains that the validity
certificates granted by the respondent no.4 on 29.04.2010 in favour of Babu
Totaram Gavli has not been revoked as on today. The respondent no.4 has
not given justifiable reasons while invalidating the caste claim of the
petitioner.
(4) wp 3556.25
5. We have considered the rival submissions canvassed on behalf of
both the sides and gone through the petitioner paper book. The issue
involved in the present petitioner is no longer res integra as held by this
Court in the case of Shweta Balaji Isankar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
(Writ Petition No.6320/2017) and in the case of Maharashtra Adiwasi
Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors; 2023
SCC Online SC 326.
6. Reverting back to the facts of the present case and on perusal of
the impugned order it prima facie appears that, on 25.02.2022, the
coordinate bench of this Court passed an order in writ petition
no.1565/2020 (Shubham Baburao Gavali V/s. The State of Maharashtra &
Ors.) and granted validity certificate to Shubham Baburao Gavali of the Koli
Mahadev scheduled tribe who is the paternal blood relative of the petitioner.
Therefore, apparently there are validities of Thakur scheduled tribe in the
family of the petitioner. Though, the respondent no.4/scrutiny committee
has observed about concealment of facts for obtaining validities by Sheshrao
Balu Gavli and Babu Totaram Gavli, however, nothing has been brought on
record to show that, the caste claim of both of them were revoked by the
respondent no.4. Therefore, considering the law laid down in the case of
Shweta Balaji Isankar and Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan
(5) wp 3556.25
Samiti, cited supra, the petitioner is entitled for the validity certificate which
shall be subject to the decision to be taken by the respondent no.4/scrutiny
committee, if it is decided to re-open the caste claim of the blood relatives of
the petitioner.
7. In view of above discussion, the writ petition is partly allowed.
The impugned order dated 05.03.2025 passed by the respondent no.4 is
quashed and set aside. The respondent no.4/scrutiny committee shall
immediately issue tribe validity certificate to the petitioner as belonging to
the Koli Mahadev scheduled tribe which shall be subject to the decision to be
taken by the committee in re-opened matters.
[Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.] [MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]
mub
