Bombay High Court
Amol Gangadhar Pallewad vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 16 January, 2025
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2025:BHC-AUG:2049-DB
*1* wp734o25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.734 OF 2025
Amol s/o Gangadhar Pallewad,
Age 27 years, Occu. Education,
R/o Godamgaon, Taluka Naygaon,
District Nanded.
...PETITIONER
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Maharashtra.
Through Secretary,
Department of Tribal Development,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Kinwat,
Head Office Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.
Through its Member Secretary.
...RESPONDENTS
...
Shri Deepak D. Chaudhari, Advocate a/w Shri Vijay G.
Gangalwad, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Ms. P.J. Bharad, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 2/State.
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL
&
PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, JJ.
DATE : 16th January, 2025.
JUDGMENT (Prafulla S. Khubalkar, J.) :
-
Heard.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard
*2* wp734o25
finally by the consent of the parties.
3. The petitioner takes exception to the order dated
08.01.2025 passed by respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee
invalidating his claim for 'Mannervarlu', Scheduled Tribe.
4. Advocate Shri Chaudhari for the petitioner has
submitted that the impugned order is unsustainable since the
Scrutiny Committee has failed to appreciate that the petitioner's
first cousin Devidas Vasant Pallewad had been granted validity
pursuant to the order dated 26.05.2009 passed by the Scrutiny
Committee at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. It is submitted that
Devidas Vasant Pallewad is the first cousin of the petitioner
which fact is demonstrated on the basis of the affidavit of
genealogy filed on record in support of the tribe claim. It is
vehemently argued that in view of this validity, the petitioner's
claim ought to have been validated. In support of his
submissions, the vigilance enquiry report in the matter of
Devidas and the order dated 26.05.2009 passed by the Scrutiny
Committee are filed on record.
5. Advocate Ms. P.J. Bharad, the learned AGP for the
respondents, has vehemently opposed the petition by contending
*3* wp734o25
that no reliance can be placed on the validity of Devidas in view
of the discrepancy in genealogies submitted by Devidas in
support of his tribe claim. She strenuously submitted that
Devidas had claimed close relationship with another validity
holder Babarao Narayan Pallewad, however, they are not related.
She has submitted that on comparative study of genealogy as
submitted by the petitioner and that of Devidas, it becomes clear
that Devidas had submitted wrong genealogy only to claim
benefit of validity in favour of Babarao Narayan Pallewad. By
pointing out the affidavit of Devidas and the statement of
Babarao as referred in the impugned order, it is submitted that
the validity of Devidas cannot be relied upon for claiming any
benefit by the petitioner.
6. We have considered rival contentions and perused
the original record as made available by the respondents.
7. The Scrutiny Committee has invalidated the
petitioner's claim observing that the petitioner has failed to
establish his claim on the basis of documentary evidence as well
as on account of failure in affinity test. After quoting genealogy
tree of the family members of the petitioner, the Scrutiny
*4* wp734o25
Committee has observed that there is variance in the genealogies
submitted by the paternal side relatives of the petitioner and,
therefore, even though the validity is granted to the petitioner's
cousin brother Devidas Vasant Pallewad, the petitioner's claim
cannot be entertained.
8. It is crucial to note that the Scrutiny Committee at
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar had passed a reasoned order in the
matter of Devidas and by referring to the documents submitted
by him, the Scrutiny Committee had observed that in view of
documentary evidence produced on record and by relying upon
the vigilance report in the matter of Devidas, he was entitled for
grant of validity certificate. It has to be noted that the vigilance
report in the matter of Devidas is in his favour in which, it is
observed by the Research Officer that cultural traditions and
customs as narrated by the candidate match with the tribe
Mannervarlu. It has to be noted that by relying upon the
vigilance cell report in the matter of Devidas, the Scrutiny
Committee has validated his tribe claim. It is pertinent to note
that this order in the matter of Devidas is in force.
9. The petitioner has relied upon the validity of
*5* wp734o25
Devidas. There is no dispute about relationship of the petitioner
with Devidas being his first cousin brother. Despite strong
opposition by the respondents about reliance on the validity of
Devidas on account of variance in the names of persons in the
genealogy, fact remains that Devidas has got validity in his
favour which is in subsistence. The petitioner being cousin
brother of Devidas, is entitled to take benefit of the said validity.
10. In view of the submissions of the learned AGP
raising questions on the validity of Devidas, although there is
possibility of reopening the matter of Devidas, same cannot be a
hurdle in the matter of deciding the petitioner's claim as on
today.
11. In view of the above, the instant petition needs to be
decided in view of the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee in
favour of Devidas Vasant Pallewad and the consequent validity
certificate. Hence, the following order:-
(a) The Writ Petition is partly allowed.
(b) The impugned order dated 08.01.2025 passed by
respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside.
*6* wp734o25
(c) Respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee is directed to
immediately issue validity certificate of 'Mannervarlu',
Scheduled Tribe, in favour of the petitioner.
(d) The validity certificate to be issued to the petitioner, shall
be subject to the final outcome of the matters of validity holders,
which the Scrutiny Committee has decided to reopen.
(e) The petitioner shall not be entitled to claim equities.
(f) No order as to costs.
12. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
kps ( PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.) ( MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)
