Bombay High Court
Ku. Jaya Ramkrushna Pawar (After ... vs S. T. Caste Certificate Scrutiny ... on 12 August, 2025
Author: M.S. Jawalkar
Bench: M.S. Jawalkar
2025:BHC-NAG:7891-DB
Judgment 1 901wp2774.22+1.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 2774 OF 2022
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 5721 OF 2024
WRIT PETITION NO. 2774 OF 2022
(1) Shubham Nandkumar Pawar,
aged 24 years, Occ. Student,
R/o Moti Nagar, Amravati.
(2) Snehal Nandkumar Pawar,
aged 27 years, Occ. M.B.B.S.
passed, R/o Moti Nagar,
Amravati.
.....PETITIONER(S)
// VERSUS //
The Scheduled Tribes Caste
Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
through its Member Secretary,
Chaprasipura, Amravati.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
..𝓐..
Judgment 2 901wp2774.22+1.odt
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 5721 OF 2024
Ku. Jaya Ramkrushna Pawar
(after marriage Jaya Anilrao
Somwanshi),
aged major, R/o. Angadsingh
layout, Mangrulpir, Tq.
Mangrulpir, District Washim.
.....PETITIONER(S)
// VERSUS //
Scheduled Tribe Caste
Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
through its Member Secretary,
Chaprasipura, Amravati.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
Shri R.S.Parsodkar, Advocate for the Petitioner(s)
Shri A.M. Joshi, AGP for the Respondent
●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
CORAM : M.S. JAWALKAR & PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.
CLOSED FOR JUDGMENT ON :- JULY 24, 2025
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON :- AUGUST 12, 2025
JUDGMENT :
- (PER:- M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)
..𝓐..
Judgment 3 901wp2774.22+1.odt
. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent of learned Counsel for the respective parties.
(2) Being aggrieved by the impugned orders dated
18/11/2021 (in W.P. No. 2774/2022) and 29/12/2023 (in W.P.
No. 5721/2024) passed by the Respondent - Scheduled Tribes
Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati (for short, "the
Scrutiny Committee") invalidating the tribe claims of the
Petitioners for "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe, the Petitioners have
filed the present Writ Petitions.
(3) Since Writ Petition No. 2774/2022 is treated as main
Petition, the facts and contentions stated in the said Petition are
set out for adjudication of the issue involved in both the
Petitions and they are being decided by this common judgment.
(4) In Writ Petition No. 2774/2022, the Petitioners -
Shubham and Snehal are brother and sister. In Writ Petition
No. 5721/2024, the Petitioner is cousin sister of Snehal and
Shubham.
..𝓐..
Judgment 4 901wp2774.22+1.odt
(5) The Petitioners submit that they belong to "Thakur"
Scheduled Tribe which is enlisted at Serial No. 44 of the
Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. The Petitioners
are conferred with the tribe certificates of "Thakur" Scheduled
Tribe on 14/06/2018. The tribe of their father Nandkumar
Manikrao is also recorded as "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe in the
School Transfer Certificate dated 02/07/1969.
(6) The Petitioners further submit that the tribe of
grandfather of the Petitioners - Manikrao is recorded as
"Thakur" Scheduled Tribe in the records of the Zilla Parishad
Primary School, Ganori which is dated 07/07/1934. So also, the
tribe of Manikrao Mahadeo is recorded as "Thakur" Scheduled
Tribe in the records of the Primary School, Ganori.
(7) The tribe claims of the Petitioners were submitted to
the Scrutiny Committee. Thereafter, the Scrutiny Committee
forwarded the same to the Vigilance Cell for enquiry. The Police
Vigilance Cell submitted vigilance report to the Scrutiny
Committee. According to the Petitioners, the said Police
Vigilance Report is totally illegal. In the said report at Serial
..𝓐..
Judgment 5 901wp2774.22+1.odt
No.1 Keshav @ Sheshrao, the tribe of cousin great grandfather is
recorded as "Bhat" in 1920. The Scrutiny Committee rejected the
tribe claims of the Petitioners by order dated 18/11/2021 on the
basis of area restriction, which is absolutely illegal.
(8) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the
Scrutiny Committee did not consider the oldest documents
pertaining to the years 1930, 1934 and 1936 etc. of grandfather,
great grandfather etc., which are the oldest entries prior to the
independence and have the highest probative value.
Surprisingly, the Scrutiny Committee recorded a finding that
those documents are consistent with the fact that the Petitioners
belong to "Thakur" and not "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe.
(9) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the
Petitioner No. 1 has completed B. Tech. Course in the year 2021,
but due to the non-submission of tribe validity certificate, the
college has not issued his final year mark sheet, degree certificate
and transfer certificate. The degree certificate and final year
mark sheet are required to pursue higher education as well as for
employment purpose. Therefore, he urgently requires tribe
..𝓐..
Judgment 6 901wp2774.22+1.odt
validity certificate to pursue his education. Insofar as the
Petitioner No. 2 is concerned, she has completed M.B.B.S.
Course examination in the year 2018. Thereafter, she appeared
for postgraduate medical admission in NEET PG in May, 2022.
The result of the said examination is declared in June, 2022. For
further education and employment purpose, she also urgently
requires the certificate of validity. It is further submitted that
the tribe of his cousin great grandfather Himmatrao is also
recorded as "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe on 02/10/1919.
(10) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that
during the tribe claims pending before the Scrutiny Committee,
the Petitioners moved to this Court by filling the Writ Petition
No. 5480/2018. This Court, by order dated 05/03/2020 directed
the Scrutiny Committee to decide the matter within three
months. The tribe claims of the Petitioners were invalidated on
18/11/2021 by the Respondent - Scrutiny Committee. The said
order dated 18/11/2021 is the subject matter of challenge in the
present Writ Petition.
..𝓐..
Judgment 7 901wp2774.22+1.odt
(11) The genealogy tree submitted by the Petitioners to
the Scrutiny Committee is as under:-
(12) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, in support of his
contentions, relied on the following citations:-
(a) Palghat Jilla Thandan Samudhaya Samrakshna Samithi
& another vs. State of Kerala & another, 1994 1 SCC 359;
(b) Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan
Samiti vs. State of Maharashtra & others, (2023) SCC
Online SC 326
(13) On the contrary, the learned AGP submits that
though the Petitioners have stated that the tribe of great
..𝓐..
Judgment 8 901wp2774.22+1.odt
grandfather Manik Mahadev and Ganpat Mahadev are recorded
as "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe on 09.04.1930, 07.07.1934 and
09.03.1936 in the school documents and bonafide certificate,
however, upon a detailed inquiry conducted by the Vigilance
Officer, the Caste entries of 'Bhat' are found in the Collector
Office documents, Birth & Death Extract of years 1920, 1925,
1926, 1927 of the Petitioners great great grandfather, which are
the oldest entries. In the Scheduled Tribes list of State of
Maharashtra, the 'Thakur' tribe is enlisted at Serial No. 44 as
'Thakur' only and not 'Bhat' and 'Thakur Bhat'.
(14) Learned AGP further contended that in the State of
Maharashtra, different "Thakur" tribes are in existence, and
every "Thakur" is not a tribe. Hence, "Thakur" entry of tribe in
the documents does not necessarily speak of one's social status.
Hence, socio-cultural affinity plays a very important role in such
cases where there are same names i.e. synonymous caste name
with tribe name but having the existence of different social
status groups. In the State of Maharashtra, one such example is
of 'Thakur' tribe and 'Thakur' high tribe or upper tribe. As per
the provisions of Section 8, engrafted in the Maharashtra
..𝓐..
Judgment 9 901wp2774.22+1.odt
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes
(Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and
Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and
Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000, the burden to prove
tribe claim squarely rests on the shoulders of the claimant. The
claimant has to establish and prove that his claim is genuine.
(15) It is further contended that the Scrutiny Committee
found that the information furnished by the Petitioners during
hearing and during course of vigilance enquiry relating to their
customs, socio affinity and the report submitted by the Vigilance
Cell Officer clearly shows that the Petitioners could not prove
their socio cultural affinity with the "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe.
The "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe resides/habitats only in the
villages and Talukas of Thane District, Kulaba District, Nashik
(only in Nashik Taluka), Pune and Ahmadnagar District only.
The residence of Thakur Scheduled Tribe is not traced in Dist.
Amravati (Ordinary residence of Petitioners). The Scrutiny
Committee has also granted opportunity to the Petitioners to
prove their claim, but they have failed to do so. Hence, the
impugned orders passed by the Scrutiny Committee are just,
..𝓐..
Judgment 10 901wp2774.22+1.odt
proper and legal, and hence, the Writ Petitions filed by the
Petitioners are liable to be dismissed.
(16) We have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners
and learned AGP for the Respondent, perused the impugned
order and record and proceedings of the Scrutiny Committee
and considered the citations relied on by the Petitioners.
(17) Admittedly, this Court in Writ Petition No.
6015/2022 (Dipak Pawar vs. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee & others) has granted validities in favour of
the Petitioners. This entry of Bhat of the year 1990 is considered
by this Court. There are entries of the years 1916 and 1919
showing the tribes of Himmatrao and Bawlya as Thakur
Scheduled Tribe. The Scrutiny Committee has not considered
the above judgment of this Court and passed perverse order. In
reply to this Vigilance report, it is made clear by the Petitioners
that Bhat entries are not from his family. The Scrutiny
Committee failed to discuss these documents which are of the
years 1916 and 1919. Those documents are earlier in point of
time and having more probative value than the subsequent
..𝓐..
Judgment 11 901wp2774.22+1.odt
entries of Bhat. Even it is not made clear how these persons
showing entry 'Bhat' are in relation with the Petitioners. The
genealogy which was obtained during the Vigilance Cell does
not show the name 'Pundlik' (first document showing Bhat
entry). There is no person by name Sheshrao Mahadev in the
genealogy (second document showing Bhat entry). There is no
son by name Keshav Seshrao (third document showing entry of
Bhat). Though Sheshrao is in the genealogy of the Petitioner,
there are no further details of the said Sheshrao in the 4 th entry
of Bhat. Thus, most of the entries are not in the blood relations.
This aspect is totally ignored by the Scrutiny Committee.
(18) The documents which are prior to 1927 showing the
blood relatives of the Petitioner as Thakur were not discussed by
the Scrutiny Committee. The Scrutiny Committee, without
discussing the old documents having more probative value,
discussed the irrelevant things in the impugned orders i.e. as to
who has withdrawn their tribe claim of Thakur or whose tribe
claims were declared as invalid. Every case has to be assessed on
its own merit. In fact, there are consistent entries of 'Thakur'
Scheduled Tribe in the documents of forefathers of the
..𝓐..
Judgment 12 901wp2774.22+1.odt
Petitioner. When the High Court has granted validity to the
persons in the blood relation of the Petitioners, the Scrutiny
Committee ought to have granted the validity certificates to the
Petitioners, specifically when the entry of Bhat is considered by
this Court in Writ Petition No. 6015/2022.
(19) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, in support of his
contentions, relied on the judgment in the case of Palghat Jilla
Thandan Samudhaya Samrakshna Samithi (supra) wherein the
Hon'ble Apex Court held that the Scheduled Castes Order has to
be applied as it stands and no enquiry can be held or evidence
led in to determine whether or not some particular community
falls within it or outside it. No action to modify the plain effect
of the Scheduled Castes Order, except as contemplated by
Article 341, is valid.
(20) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners also relied on the
judgment in the case of Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat
Swarakshan Samiti (supra) wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court, in
Paragraph No. 36, has concluded as under:-
"36. Thus, to conclude, we hold that:
..𝓐..
Judgment 13 901wp2774.22+1.odt
(a) .....
(b) For the reasons which we have recorded, affinity test
cannot be conclusive either way. When an affinity test is
conducted by the Vigilance Cell, the result of the test
along with all other material on record having probative
value will have to be taken into consideration by the
Scrutiny Committee for deciding the caste validity claim;
and
(c) In short, affinity test is not a litmus test to decide a
caste claim and is not an essential part in the process of
the determination of correctness of a caste or tribe claim
in every case."
(21) Thus, the area restriction is already removed in 1976
and insofar as the affinity is concerned, the oldest documents of
the years 1916 and 1919 of the blood relatives of the Petitioners
showing their tribe as 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe require
consideration for deciding the tribe claims of the Petitioners.
(22) The Scrutiny Committee, in spite of having
knowledge of the above referred judgments, bent upon to
invalidate the tribe claims of the Petitioners. In our considered
opinion, the Scrutiny Committee has not considered the relevant
documents and considered only irrelevant documents and
..𝓐..
Judgment 14 901wp2774.22+1.odt
material to invalidate the tribe claims of the Petitioners and
hence, impugned orders need to be quashed and set aside.
ORDER
(a) The Writ Petitions are allowed.
(b) The impugned order dated 18/11/2021 in
Case Nos. 5/503/Edu./072019/148870 &
5/503/Edu/072019/148869 and the impugned order
dated 29/12/2023 in Case No.
5/503/Preser/012020/162449 passed by the
Respondent - Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Amravati are hereby quashed
and set aside.
(c) It is declared that the Petitioners have duly established
that they belong to 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe. The
Respondent - Caste Scrutiny Committee is hereby
directed to issue validity certificates to the Petitioners
as they belong to 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe within a
period of two weeks.
..𝓐..
Judgment 15 901wp2774.22+1.odt
(d) The Petitioners can rely on the copy of this judgment,
if required, till the validity certificates are issued to
them.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Pending
Application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.) (M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)
..𝓐..
