Bombay High Court
Ku. Mansi Ramchandra Bhatkar vs District Caste Certificate Scrutiny ... on 12 August, 2025
Author: M.S. Jawalkar
Bench: M.S. Jawalkar
2025:BHC-NAG:7888-DB
Judgment 1 25wp4201.22+1.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 4201 OF 2022
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4202 OF 2022
WRIT PETITION NO. 4201 OF 2022
Ku. Mansi Ramchandra Bhatkar,
Aged 18 Yrs., Occ.: Student,
R/o. Shahapur, Tq. Warud,
District Amravati
.....PETITIONER(S)
// VERSUS //
District Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Amravati
Through its Member Secretary
and Research Officer, Office at
B-Wing, 1st Floor, Dr.
Babasaheb Ambedkar Social
Justice Bhavan, Camp Road,
Amravati - 444606
.....RESPONDENT(S)
..𝓐..
Judgment 2 25wp4201.22+1.odt
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4202 OF 2022
Vinay Ramchandra Bhatkar,
Aged 21 Yrs., Occ.: Student,
R/o. Shahapur, Tq. Warud,
District Amravati
.....PETITIONER(S)
// VERSUS //
District Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Amravati
Through its Member Secretary
and Research Officer, Office at
B-Wing, 1st Floor, Dr.
Babasaheb Ambedkar Social
Justice Bhavan, Camp Road,
Amravati - 444606
.....RESPONDENT(S)
●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
Shri P.A.Kadu, Advocate for Petitioner(s).
Ms. D.V.Sapkal, AGP for Respondent(s)/State.
●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
CORAM : M.S. JAWALKAR & PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.
CLOSED FOR JUDGMENT ON :- JULY 21, 2025
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON :- AUGUST , 2025
..𝓐..
Judgment 3 25wp4201.22+1.odt
JUDGMENT :
- (PER:- M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)
. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of learned Counsel for the respective parties.
(2) Being aggrieved by the orders dated 25/05/2022
passed by the Respondent - District Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati (for short, "the Scrutiny Committee")
invalidating the caste claim of the Petitioners for the caste
"Dhangar" which comes under NT-C category, the Petitioners
have filed the present Writ Petitions.
(3) The facts giving rise for filing of the present Writ
Petitions are as under:-
(4) The Petitioners are real sister and brother. They are
students and have desire to pursue education either in medical
science or engineering, therefore, they are preparing for NEET
and CAT examinations. The caste claims of the Petitioners were
submitted to the Respondent - Scrutiny Committee for
verification of "Dhangar" caste which falls under the NT-C
category. The Petitioners along with their Applications had
..𝓐..
Judgment 4 25wp4201.22+1.odt
submitted as many as 8 to 9 documents. The Scrutiny Committee
forwarded the same to the Vigilance Cell for enquiry. The
Vigilance Officer conducted an enquiry and submitted the
report to the Scrutiny Committee.
(5) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that in
order to prove their caste claims, pre-independence documents
of the Petitioners' grandfather specifically mentioning the caste
as "Dhangar were submitted by the Petitioners to the Scrutiny
Committee. The Respondent - Scrutiny Committee failed to
appreciate the Vigilance Cell's report in which it is specifically
mentioned that the grandfather of Petitioners was residing in
Pavani and he belonged to "Dhangar" caste. It is also submitted
that the statements of two persons of Village Pavani were
recorded and they categorically stated that the grandfather of
Petitioners was residing in Pavani, he died in Pavani and he
belonged to the "Dhangar" caste.
(6) It is also submitted that the Petitioners had submitted
the genealogy in which the name of grandfather of the
Petitioners is specifically mentioned. The Vigilance Cell's report
..𝓐..
Judgment 5 25wp4201.22+1.odt
also supports the case of the Petitioners and reflects that the
grandfather of the Petitioners namely Babu was residing in
Pavani village and he belonged to "Dhangar" Caste. Thus, the
Petitioners have established their relation and connection with
the entry in Kotwal Register dated 08/05/1939. The genealogy
submitted by the Petitioners to the Scrutiny Committee is as
under:-
(7) The learned Counsel for the Petitioners, in support of
his contentions, relied on the following citations:-
(i) Writ Petition No. 3688/2019 (Satish S/o. Arun Shirsat
V/s. State of Maharashtra & anr.) judgment passed by this
Court dated 25/09/2020; and
..𝓐..
Judgment 6 25wp4201.22+1.odt
(ii) Mah. Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti V/s.
State of Maharashtra and ors., AIR 2023 SC 1657.
(8) On the contrary, the Respondent - Scrutiny
Committee submitted that the Petitioner - Mansi birth
certificate dated 13/07/2021 issued by the Registrar, Birth-Death
and Marriage Registration, Gram Panchayat Office, Shahapur do
not mention the caste. The school leaving certificate of the
Petitioner - Mansi dated 21/06/2019 from Namdeorao Tukaramji
Radke High School & Shankarrao Bande Art & Science College,
Warud mentions the caste as 'Dhangar' with admission date as
17/06/2017. As this is not prior to the deemed date, it does not
prove the caste claim of the Petitioner.
(9) It is further submitted that the school leaving
certificates dated 08/07/2019 issued by J.J. Kherde Primary
School, Warud mentions the caste 'Dhangar' with admission
dates as 01/07/2008 and 18/06/2009. These documents are also
post-deemed date and thus not considered. The certificate dated
24/08/2021 issued by Mahatma Fule Art, Commerce & Sitaramji
Chaudhari Science College, Warud mentions the caste 'Dhangar'
..𝓐..
Judgment 7 25wp4201.22+1.odt
and admission date as 27/06/2019. Being post-deemed date, the
same was not considered. Furthermore, the school leaving
certificate of the father of the Petitioners dated 07/08/1990
issued by Adiwasi High School, Maudhana, Baitul (M.P.) shows
caste as 'Dhangar' with birth date as 10/07/1976 and place as
Chincholi, Baitul. This only proves the residency in Madhya
Pradesh, hence, not valid for proving caste origin in
Maharashtra. The Kotwal Book extract issued by Tahsildar,
Warud mentions one Babu Dhangar of Mouje Pavani having a
daughter named Kausli on 08/05/1939. However, only a single
name 'Babu' is mentioned, and there's no proof linking him as
the Petitioner's great-grandfather. Thus, the claims of the
Petitioners were rejected by the Scrutiny Committee.
(10) It is further submitted that the school leaving
certificate of the Petitioners' paternal uncle, Hemraj Babulal
Bhatkar, dated 07/03/2022, was found to be forged. The
Respondent - Scrutiny Committee, upon verifying the original
admission register and an affidavit by Headmistress Smt.
Archana Pradip Sagale, confirmed that no such certificate was
ever issued. The forged documents were submitted to mislead
..𝓐..
Judgment 8 25wp4201.22+1.odt
the Scrutiny Committee for caste validity and was rightly
discarded. Hence, the learned AGP prays for dismissal of the
Writ Petitions.
(11) The learned AGP for the Respondent - Scrutiny
Committee, in support of her contentions, relied on the
judgment in the case of Rajendra S/o. Shivram Thakur V/s. State
of Maharashtra and ors., 2019(4) Mh.L.J. 721.
(12) We have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners
and learned AGP for the Respondent, perused the record and
proceedings of the Scrutiny Committee and considered the
citations relied on by the parties.
(13) It appears that the caste 'Dhangar' is included at
Serial No. 29 of the VJNT in the year 1961. The documents
produced by the Petitioners are subsequent to 1961 except one
document i.e. 08/05/1939 wherein it is shown that Babu gave
birth to a daughter by name Kausli on 08/05/1939. The
genealogy is given by one Ramchandra which was collected
during the vigilance enquiry. This entry was verified by the
..𝓐..
Judgment 9 25wp4201.22+1.odt
Vigilance Cell by inspecting the Kotwal register, Tahsil
Karyalaya, Warud. The Vigilance Cell also confirmed this fact
that the father of the Applicant left home since his delivery and
was residing at Betul. However, after marriage, he was residing
at Shahapur. The reasoning, while discarding this document of
1939, appears to be that it is in single name i.e. 'Babu'. Though
this document is verified from Tahsil Office, Warud, it is
discarded on the ground that there is only entry of name 'Babu'.
However, the Scrutiny Committee failed to appreciate this fact
that this entry was duly verified and it shows that Babu Dhangar
gave birth to a female child on 16/06/1939 by the name Kausli. If
the genealogy is perused, it shows that Babulal Dhangar was
having son by name Ramchandra and daughter Kausli.
Therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to doubt the said
document.
(14) It is true that the other documents are subsequent to
the cut off date. Insofar as the document in respect of Hemraj
Babulal Bhatkar is concerned, the Petitioners submitted before
the Scrutiny Committee that they are not relying on that
document. Moreover, Babulal Dhangar is not having any son by
..𝓐..
Judgment 10 25wp4201.22+1.odt
name Hemraj. Therefore, though initially, it appears that the
Petitioner relied on the document pertaining to Hemraj,
subsequently, that document is withdrawn by the mother of the
Petitioner.
(15) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners placed reliance
on the judgment in the case of Satish Arun Shirsat (supra). This
Court, in the said matter, held that " the genealogy is thus clearly
established by the vigilance enquiry report which has not been
considered by the majority decision of the Committee. That
being the position, the majority decision is clearly contrary to
the settled law in this regard, that pre-constitutional documents
have a great preference over any other aspect including that of
the affinity test, which only has a corroborative value."
(16) In the instant matter also, as per the genealogy, Babu
Dhangar is the grandfather of the Petitioners and as per the
entry of 1939, he gave birth to a female child Kausli, who is also
shown in the genealogy. As such, the relationship is duly
established between the Petitioners and the grandfather Babu
Dhangar and the entry pertains to 16/06/1939. Thus, the finding
..𝓐..
Judgment 11 25wp4201.22+1.odt
recorded by the Scrutiny Committee is apparently perverse.
(17) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners also placed
reliance on the judgment in the case of Mah. Adivasi 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) .....
(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."
(18) As against this, the learned AGP for the Respondent
relied on the judgment in the case of Rajendra Thakur (supra)
and contended that the candidates desirous of seeking a caste
certificate shall have to apply to the Competent Authority
having jurisdiction over the area or place to which he/she or his/
..𝓐..
Judgment 12 25wp4201.22+1.odt
her father or grandfather originally belongs or was/is an
ordinary residents or native of that place.
(19) In our considered opinion, the entry of 1939 is the
oldest entry and prior to the cut off date. There is no dispute
over the genealogy. As such, the entry of Babu Dhangar is
verified and clearly established. The question of looking
somewhere else does not arise at all. Even if there are no details
of the name of father of Babu, however, it is proved that Kausli
is the daughter of Babu and her name is appearing in the
genealogy.
(20) As such, in our considered opinion, the impugned
order is not sustainable in the eyes of law, and hence, liable to be
quashed and set aside.
(21) Hence, we proceed to pass following order:-
ORDER
(a) The Writ Petitions are allowed.
..𝓐..
Judgment 13 25wp4201.22+1.odt
(b) The impugned orders dated 25/05/2022 passed by the
Respondent - District Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati in Case No. fttkizkil/ve/fo|kFkhZZ/
ek.jk.Hk.iz.dz. 264692/2021/851 aand Case No.
fttkizkil/ve/fo|kFkhZZ/fo.jk.Hk./iz.dz. 264851/2021/855 are
hereby quashed and set aside.
(c) It is declared that the Petitioners have duly established
that they belong to Tribe 'Dhangar' (VJNT). The
Respondent - Caste Scrutiny Committee is hereby
directed to issue validity certificates to the Petitioners
as they belong to Tribe 'Dhangar' (VJNT) within a
period of two weeks.
(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..
