Bombay High Court
Nilesh Pralhad Ingle vs S.T. Caste Certificate Scrutiny ... on 14 February, 2025
Author: Avinash G. Gharote
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
2025:BHC-NAG:1497-DB
1 wp514.2024..odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 514 OF 2024
Nilesh Pralhad Ingle,
Aged 47 yrs,
Occ. Service as Police Constable,
r/o Raje Udaram Colony,
Civil Lines, Washim ...... PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee,
through its Member Secretary, Yavatmal
2. The Superintendent of Police,
Washim .....RESPONDENTS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. R.S. Parsodkar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. P.P. Pendke, AGP, for respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- AVINASH G. GHAROTE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATE : 14.02.2025
JUDGMENT (Per : Abhay J. Mantri, J.)
Heard finally with the consent of the learned Advocate
for the parties.
2. The challenge is to the order dated 03.01.2024, passed
by respondent No.1 Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Yavatmal (for short-" the Committee"), which
invalidated the petitioner's caste claim that he belongs to the
'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe.
2 wp514.2024..odt
3. The petitioner is a Police constable. His caste claim of
being a 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe was forwarded along with
necessary documents to the Committee for verification. Dissatisfied
with the documents filed by the petitioner, the Committee
forwarded the proposal to the Vigilance Cell for detailed enquiry.
After considering the Vigilance Cell Report, reply from the
petitioner, and the documents on record, the committee invalidated
his caste claim of being a ' Thakur' Scheduled Tribe; hence, this
petition.
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended
that by virtue of the order dated 30.10.2023, in Writ Petition No.
5580/2017, the Committee has granted validity to the real sister of
the petitioner that she belongs to 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe.
Therefore, he urged that a petition be allowed in view of the said
decision.
5. In response, the learned AGP has not disputed this fact
and conceded to the petitioner's contentions, though by filing the
reply, they prayed for dismissal of the petition.
3 wp514.2024..odt
6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has also placed
reliance on the decision in Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale vs Divisional
Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1 and others (2010(6) Mh.L.J.
401 ("Apoorva Nichle") and Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat
Swarakshan Samiti vs State of Maharashtra and others , AIR 2023 SC
1657 ("Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat").
7. We have appreciated the submissions of learned counsel
for the parties and gone through the impugned order, the pleadings,
and the citations relied upon by the petitioner. We have also gone
through the judgment dated 30.10.2023 passed in Writ Petition No.
5580/2017. We have perused the original case record and returned
it.
8. After considering the record and documents, vide
judgment dated 30.10.2023 in Writ Petition 5580/2017, this Court
directed the Committee to grant a validity Certificate to the real
sister of the petitioner. Therefore, in our view, as per the dictum laid
down in Apoorva Nichle's case (supra), the Committee ought not to
have refused to grant validity in favour of the petitioner but was
required to issue validity in his favour unless the Committee finds
4 wp514.2024..odt
that the validity certificate of such relative has been obtained by
fraud or was issued without any authority/jurisdiction. In such an
eventuality, there is no reason for the Committee to discard said
validity certificates.
9. The petitioner has produced eight documents to
substantiate his case. All documents pertain to his ancestors from
1951 to 2023, where their caste was recorded as " Thakur." The
vigilance cell also discovered two documents prior to the pre-
independent era, i.e., 1926 and 1931, wherein his ancestor's caste
was recorded as "Thakur." Neither the vigilance cell nor the
committee have disputed the said entries or documents; therefore,
there is no reason to disbelieve them. No adverse entry was found to
the vigilance cell. Furthermore, the Scrutiny Committee has not
considered the Validity Certificates issued in favour of the
petitioner's real sister. However, it erred in observing that adverse
entries have been found but failed to point out those. Moreover, the
relationship with the said persons is not in dispute.
10. Apart from the above, the claim of the petitioner is also
covered by the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
5 wp514.2024..odt
Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat (supra); relevant observations are
reproduced herein below:
"Affinity test cannot be termed as a litmus test,
particularly when the pre-constitutional documents
exist and are placed on record. Moreover, the said test
cannot be said to be conclusive to determine whether
the petitioner belongs to the 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe
or not".
11. Besides, it seems that in view of the law laid down
in the cases of Apoorva Nichle and Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur
Jamat, the petitioner's case appears to be covered. Therefore, it
would be incumbent on the part of the Committee to award
the same status as is awarded to his real sister that the
petitioner belongs to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe.
12. In view of the discussion supra, we deem it appropriate
to allow the petition.
i) The petition is allowed.
ii) Impugned order dated 03.01.2024, passed by
respondent No.1 Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Yavatmal, is hereby quashed and set
aside.
6 wp514.2024..odt
iii) It is declared that the petitioner belongs to the
'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe. The Committee shall issue a
Validity Certificate to the petitioner within four weeks
from receipt of a copy of this judgment.
13. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.
(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
Belkhede
Signed by: Mr. R. S. Belkhede
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 14/02/2025 14:27:22
