Bombay High Court
Kum. Sayali Sanjay Pawar vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 8 January, 2025
Author: Bharati Dangre
Bench: Bharati Dangre
2025:BHC-AS:2664-DB
Digitally
signed by
ARUNA
ARUNA SANDEEP
SANDEEP TALWALKAR
TALWALKAR Date:
2025.01.20
20:33:56
+0530
Sayali Sanjay Pawar 20-1-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3415 OF 2020
Kum. Sayali Sanjay Pawar Aged years,
resident of B-902, Onkar Abhiman Apartment,
Near Tree House School, Dudhane Nagar,
Karvenagar, Pune-411052 ...Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Tribal Development
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-400032.
2. Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Nashik Division,
Nashik, through its Member-Secretary,
having its Office at Adivasi Vikas
Bhavan Old Agra Road, Nashik,
Dist. Nashik. ...Respondents
...
Mr. R. K. Mendadkar for the Petitioner.
Mr. B. V. Samant, Addl. G. P. a/w Ms. D. S. Deshmukh, AGP for
the State.
Nikita 1 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 20/01/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 25/01/2025 03:36:26 :::
Sayali Sanjay Pawar 20-1-2025.odt
CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.
DATED : 8th JANUARY, 2025
JUDGMENT (PER ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) :
-
1. Rule. By consent of the respective counsel, representing the
parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith. Petition is taken up for
hearing.
2. The decision dated 29.07.2018 of the Respondent No.2 in
case No.3-ST/2014/13458 invalidating the claim of the
Petitioner of belonging to a "Thakar" Scheduled Tribe
category, is assailed in this petition ("Impugned decision").
3. Petitioner was granted Caste Certificate bearing
No.SDO/9/2012 dated 01.10.2012 by the Competent Authority
as belonging to "Thakar" Scheduled Tribe and with an
intention to pursue higher education, in the year 2014, she
moved the Respondent No.2 for verification of her Caste
Certificate. By the Impugned decision, the Respondent No.2
has invalidated the Caste Certificate of the Petitioner.
Nikita 2 of 6
Sayali Sanjay Pawar 20-1-2025.odt
The Grounds of invalidation, as per the Impugned order
are as follows:
A) Documents and the other material produced on
record do not establish Petitioner's claim as belonging to
"Thakar" Scheduled Tribe.
B) Petitioner has failed to prove her affinity with
"Thakar" Schedule Tribe.
C) Petitioner has failed to establish her ethnic linkage
by way of affinity test with genuine Schedule Tribe
"Thakar".
D) Validity Certificates relied by the Petitioner from
her paternal side cannot be considered.
4. Mr R. K. Mendadkar appearing on behalf of the
Petitioner submits that documents from the paternal side of
the Petitioner showing their caste as "Thakar" were placed
before the Respondent No.2. He further submits that Caste
Validity Certificate (Thakar) is issued to her father namely
Sanjay Dnyandeo Pawar and other relatives from paternal
side and hence the reasons offered in the impugned decision
Nikita 3 of 6
Sayali Sanjay Pawar 20-1-2025.odt
are erroneous and he would pray that the petition be allowed.
The learned Add. G.P. Mr. B. V. Samant has defended the
Impugned decision, he relying upon the reasons set out
therein and it is his contention that the petition deserve to be
dismissed.
5. We have perused the Certificate of Validity dated
08.11.2001 issued by the Respondent No.2 in favour of
Sanjay Dnyandeo Pawar, the father of the Petitioner. The
Certificate bearing No.MAG/3/33/79 dated 10.05.1979, has
declared Sanjay Dnyandeo Pawar to be belonging to "Thakar"
Scheduled Tribe.
Mr. Samant, the learned Addl. GP does not dispute the
relationship of the Petitioner with Mr. Sanjay Dnyandeo
Pawar.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maharashtra
Adivasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs. State of
Maharashtra and Ors.1, has considered the sanctity and
significance of the prescribed procedure in the Maharashtra
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes
1 2023 SCC OnLine SC 326
Nikita 4 of 6
Sayali Sanjay Pawar 20-1-2025.odt
(Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes
and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and
Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 and where the
importance and significance of the vigilance cell inquiry and
establishing the relationship by the claimant with those
having a Caste or a Tribe Validity Certificate, is specifically
focused upon.
When the Respondent No.2 did not find the Petitioner's
relationship with Sanjay Dnyandeo Pawar disputable, the law
laid down by this Court in Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale Vs.
Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee No.1 Nagpur2 should
have been followed by the Committee and it could not have
ignored the Validity Certificate granted to the biological
father of the Petitioner.
It is not the case of the Respondent No.2 that the Caste
Certificate of Sanjay Dnyandeo Pawar has been subsequently
invalidated and no material in that regard is placed before us.
7. In light of above position of law emerging before us, for
reasons assigned in the impugned decision by the
Respondent No.2 in invalidating the Caste Certificate of the
2 2010(6) Mh. L.J.401:AIR 2010 (6) Bom.R.21
Nikita 5 of 6
Sayali Sanjay Pawar 20-1-2025.odt
Petitioner are erroneous and as such liable to be interfered
with.
8. In view of the above, and considering the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maharashtra Adivasi Thakur
Jamat Swarakshan Samiti (supra) and of this Court in the
case of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale (supra) and the Caste
Validity Certificate issued to Sanjay Dnyandeo Pawar, the
petition is allowed.
9. The impugned order dated 29.07.2018 passed by the
Respondent No.2 is quashed and set aside.
The Respondent No.2 is directed to issue 'Thakar'
Scheduled Tribe validity certificate to the Petitioner, within a
period of 30 days from today.
10. Rule is made absolute in above terms with no orders as
to cost.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
Nikita 6 of 6
