Bombay High Court
Abdul Nafe Abdul Rahim Khan Thr Father ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary ... on 14 January, 2025
Author: Bharati Dangre
Bench: Bharati Dangre
2025:BHC-AS:4572-DB
WP-13662-2024 (FC).doc.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.13662 OF 2024
Abdul Nafe Abdul Rahim Khan )
Age 17 years )
Aged minor, Occu. Student )
Through his father and natural )
Guardian namely Abdul Rahim )
Khan Residing at Building no.6, )
Room No.8 I.G. Colony V.B. Nagar )
Kurla (West), Mumbai-400070 ) ....Petitioner
versus
1. State of Maharashtra )
through its Secretary, Tribal )
Development Department, )
Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032.) )
2. Scheduled Tribe Certificate )
Scrutiny Committee, )
Konkan Division,Thane through )
its Member Secretary having its )
office at MTNL Build.,6th Floor, )
near anesh Talkies, Charai, )
Dist. Thane. )
3. State Common Entrance Test Cell )
8th Floor, New Excelsior Building )
A.K. Nayak Marg, Fort, Mumbai )
4. Bhartiya Vidya Bhavans's )
Sardar Patel Institute of Technology )
its Principal having its office )
Andheri, Mumbai-400 058. ) ....Respondents
Mr. R.K. Mendadkar a/w Mr. Siddhant Sawai, Ms. Priyank Shaw, Ms.
Komal Gaikwad, for the Petitioner.
Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP, for the Respondents/State.
Kartikeya 1 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 01/02/2025 05:30:32 :::
WP-13662-2024 (FC).doc.
Ms. Kavita N Solunke a/w Shejal Hande, for Respondent No.3-CET Cell.
CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.
DATE : 14th JANUARY, 2025
JUDGMENT (PER ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) :
-
1. Rule. By consent of the respective Counsel representing the
Counsel, Rule is made returnable forthwith. Petition is taken up for
hearing.
2. The decision dated 02.09.2024 of the Respondent No.2 in Case No.
DD/TCSC/EDU/Online/Mumbai Suburban-132/2024 invalidating the
claim of the Petitioner of belonging to a "Tadvi" Tribe Category, is
assailed in this petition. (Impugned decision).
3. Petitioner was granted Caste Certificate bearing
no.MRC90036181428 dated 25.06.2019 by the Competent Authority as
belonging to "Tadvi" Tribe and with an intention to pursue higher
education in the year 2024, he moved the Respondent No.2 for verification
of his Caste Certificate. By the impugned decision, the Respondent No.1
has invalidated the Caste Certificate of the Petitioner.
4. The grounds of invalidation as per the impugned order, is that the
documents and the material produced on record do not establish the
Petitioner's claim of belonging to "Tadvi" Tribe and the Validity
Certificates relied by the Petitioner from the paternal side cannot be
considered.
Kartikeya 2 of 6
WP-13662-2024 (FC).doc.
5. Mr. R.K. Mendadkar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Petitioner submits that the Respondent No.2-Committee has ignored the
judgment and order passed by this Court in Writ Petition (ST) No.21461
of 2019 filed by Umme Aiman and Namira Khanun Abdul Hamid Khan,
the cousin sisters of the Petitioner wherein her tribe claim of belonging to
Tadvi was held to be valid. He submits that the Petitioner had relied upon
seven certificates of validity granted to the near blood relatives of the
Petitioner from paternal side, which certificates according to Mr.
Mendadkar were preceded by enquiry as contemplated under the Caste
Certificates Rules, 2003.
Reliance is placed on the Genealogy Tree (marked as X-1) . The
said Genealogy Tree is transcribed hereinafter:-
Kartikeya 3 of 6
WP-13662-2024 (FC).doc.
6. Relying on the above Genealogy Mr. Mendadkar has submitted that
paternal side blood relatives namely Yasmeen Begam, Hafiz, Abdul
Wahid, Abdul Rahim, Abdul Mukit, Abdul Rafe and Ariba have been
issued Validity Certificate by the Scrutiny Committee. He has drawn our
attention to paragraphs 16 and 17 of the order dated 01.08.2019 passed in
Writ Petition (ST) No.21461 of 2019 to contend that reference is made to
the Caste Validity Certificate of the afore-reffered paternal side relative of
the Petitioner.
On the basis of the above contentions he submits that the Impugned
Decision requires to be quashed and the Petitioner issued Caste Validity
Certificate as belonging to Tadvi Tribe.
7. The learned AGP Mr. V.M. Mali has defended the impugned
decision by relying upon the exhaustive reasoning set out therein and it is
his contention that the petition deserves to be dismissed.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maharashtra Adiwasi
Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti versus State of Maharashtra and
Others 1 has considered the sanctity and significance of the prescribed
procedure in The Maharashtra 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 where, the importance and
significance of vigilance cell inquiry and establishing the relationship by
the claimant with those having a caste or a Tribe Validity Certificate is
1 2023 SCC Online SC 326
Kartikeya 4 of 6
WP-13662-2024 (FC).doc.
specifically focused upon.
9. When the Respondent No.2-Committee did not find the relationship
with Umme Aiman and Namira Khanun Abdul Hamid Khan (Petitioners)
in Writ Petition (ST) No.21461/2019 to be disputable, the law laid down
by this Court in Apoorva D/O Vinay Nichale versus Divisional Caste
Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1 and Others 2 should have been
followed by the Committee and it could not have ignored the validity
certificate granted to the cousin sisters Umme Aiman and Namira Khanun
Abdul Hamid Khan.
It is not the case of the Respondent No.2 that the Caste Certificate
of Umme Aiman and Namira Khanun Abdul Hamid Khan has been
subsequently invalidated and no material in that regard is placed before us.
10. In light of the above position of law emerging before us, the reasons
assigned in the impugned decision by the Respondent No.2 in validating
the Caste Certificate of the Petitioner are erroneous and as such liable to
be interfered with.
11. In view of the above and considering the judgment of the Supreme
Court in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti versus
State of Maharashtra and Others (Supra) and of this Court in Apoorva
D/O Vinay Nichale versus Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee No.1 and Others (Supra) and the caste validity certificate
issued to Umme Aiman and Abdul Mukit,the petition is allowed.
2 2010 SCC Online Bom 1053
Kartikeya 5 of 6
WP-13662-2024 (FC).doc.
The impugned order dated 02.09.2024 passed by the Respondent
No.2 is quashed and set aside.
The Respondent No.2 is directed to issue "Muslim Tadvi"
Scheduled Tribe Certificate to the Petitioner within a period of six weeks
from today.
12. Rule is made absolute in the above terms, with no orders as to costs.
[ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.] [BHARATI DANGRE J.]
Kartikeya 6 of 6
