Saturday, 09, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Pooja Dnyandev Damale vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 2507 Bom

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2507 Bom
Judgement Date : 12 February, 2025

Bombay High Court

Pooja Dnyandev Damale vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 12 February, 2025

Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2025:BHC-AUG:5268-DB




                                                -1-

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                  WRIT PETITION NO.9997 OF 2023

              Rahul s/o Suresh Damale,
              Age-29 years, Occu-Education,
              R/o Pimpalgaon Fungi, Taluka
              Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar                     -- PETITIONER

              VERSUS

              1. The State of Maharashtra,
              Through Secretary,
              Department of Tribal Development,
              Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32,

              2. Scheduled Tribes Certificate
              Scrutiny Committee,
              Nashik Division, Nashik-2,
              Through its Member Secretary                 -- RESPONDENTS

                                            WITH
                                  WRIT PETITION NO.10040 OF 2023

              Pooja d/o Dnyandev Damale,
              Age-30 years, Occu-Household,
              R/o Borawake Nagar, Shrirampur,
              Taluka Shrirampur,
              District : Ahmednagar                        -- PETITIONER

              VERSUS

              1. The State of Maharashtra,
              Through Secretary,
              Department of Tribal Development,
              Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32,

              2. Scheduled Tribes Certificate
              Scrutiny Committee,

              khs/Feb.2025/9997
                                       -2-

Nashik Division, Nashik-2,
Through its Member Secretary                         -- RESPONDENTS

Mr.D.D.Choudhari, Advocate for the petitioners.
Ms.S.S.Joshi, AGP for the respondents/State in both petitions.

                        ( CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND
                                  PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, JJ. )

                             DATE : FEBRUARY 12, 2025



ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Prafulla S.Khubalkar, J.)

1. Heard learned Advocates for respective sides. Rule. Rule

made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties.

2. The petitioners have challenged the common order dated

24.01.2023 passed by respondent No.2/Scrutiny Committee

invalidating their claim for 'Koli Mahadev' Scheduled Tribe.

3. The Committee has invalidated the claims by observing

that the petitioners have failed to establish their claim on the basis of

documentary evidence as well as on account of failure to prove affinity

with 'Koli Mahadev' Scheduled Tribe. The learned Advocate

Mr.Choudhari for the petitioners has vehemently submitted that on the

strength of documentary evidence, the claims submitted before the

Committee, ought to have been validated. He has relied upon the

validity certificates in favour of close relatives of the petitioners, mainly

validity certificate dtd.18.09.2023 of Shashikant Damale who is cousin

brother of petitioner. He has submitted that the Committee has

adopted a perverse approach while considering the validities of close

blood relatives and in absence of any fraud being established, the

validity certificates are wrongly discarded.

4. Ms.S.S.Joshi, the learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2

has supported the impugned order and submitted that reliance upon

validities of Shashikant and others is misplaced since the validity

certificates were granted without considering the other relevant

documents of their family members. She has submitted that although

validity was granted to Shashikant Damale, however, the same was

without elaborate enquiry through Vigilance Cell. It is also submitted

that the petitioners have even failed to establish any ethnic linkage with

'Koli Mahadev' Scheduled Tribe and therefore the Committee has rightly

invalidated their claims on both counts.

5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the

original record in the matter of Shashikant Pandurang Damale, as made

available by the Scrutiny Committee.

6. The record in the matter of Shashikant reveals that a

Vigilance Cell enquiry was conducted and on the basis of Vigilance

Report dated 01.08.2003 and other documents relied upon by him, a

reasoned order was passed in his matter validating his claim. It is to be

noted that the Vigilance Enquiry was elaborate which even considered

the revenue record in the nature of 7/12 extract of Shashikant's

grandfather Baburao Malhari Damale, amongst other documents.

7. The relationship of petitioners with Shashikant Damale is

not disputed being paternal cousin brother. In view of the fact that

validity of Shashikant was granted after due procedure, the reasons

mentioned by the Committee to discard his validity are erroneous.

Although, the learned AGP has submitted that the validities to

petitioners' blood relatives were granted without considering the

documents showing contrary entries, the fact remains that those

validities are in force and no fraud is yet proved. The petitioners are

entitled to derive benefits of these validity certificates, however, subject

to any further decision in case the validities are re-opened.

8. In view of the position of Law as laid down in the matter of

Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs. The State of

Maharashtra and Others, Civil Appeal No.2502/2022 (AIR 2023 SC

1657 = (2023) 3 S.C.R. 1100), the scope of enquiry is compliance with

due procedure while issuing validity certificates to blood relatives.

Since validity was granted to Shashikant by following due procedure,

the petitioners being his cousin brother and sister, are entitled for

validation of their claims.

9. In view of the judgment in the matter of Shweta Balaji

Isankar Vs. State of Maharashtra and others [2018 SCC Online Bombay

10363], the petitioners are entitled for grant of validity certificates,

however, subject to decision of the validities, which the Committee may

re-open. Hence, we pass the following order :-

[a]    The writ petition is partly allowed.

[b]    The impugned orders dated 24.01.2023 passed by respondent

No.2 / Scrutiny Committee are quashed and set aside.

[c] Respondent No.2 / Scrutiny Committee is directed to

immediately issue a validity certificates of 'Koli Mahadev', Scheduled

Tribe, in favour of the petitioners.

[d] The validity certificates to be issued to the petitioners, shall be

subject to the final outcome of the matters of validity holders, which

the Scrutiny Committee has decided to reopen.

[e] The petitioners shall not be entitled to claim equities.

[f]     No order as to costs.



10.            Rule is made absolute in the above terms.




      ( PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)               ( MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)





 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter