Bombay High Court
Vaishnavi Sharad Koli vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 28 January, 2025
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2025:BHC-AUG:4814-DB
*1* wp586o25 mk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.586 OF 2025
Vaishnavi d/o Sharad Koli,
Age : 19 years, Occupation : Student,
R/o Rajuri, Dist. Dharashiv.
...PETITIONER
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Maharashtra.
Department of Tribal Development,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
Through its Secretary.
2. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar
Division, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.
Through its Member Secretary.
...RESPONDENTS
...
Shri Vivekanand U. Jadhav, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Shri R.K. Ingole, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2/State.
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL
&
PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, JJ.
DATE : 28th January, 2025
JUDGMENT (Per Prafulla S. Khubalkar, J.) :
-
Heard Advocate Vivekanand Jadhav, for the
*2* wp586o25 mk
petitioner and Advocate R.K. Ingole, the learned AGP for the
respondents/ State.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard
finally by consent of parties.
3. The petitioner has challenged the order dated
03.01.2025 passed by respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee
invalidating her claim for 'Koli Mahadev', Scheduled Tribe.
4. Respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee has passed
the impugned order by observing that the petitioner failed to
establish her tribe claim on the strength of documentary evidence
and affinity test. Although the Committee referred to the validity
certificates issued in favour of close blood relatives of the
petitioners, namely, Balaji Bhanudas Koli (uncle) and Madhura
Balaji Koli (cousin sister), however, by referring to other
documents mentioning caste/ tribe as 'Koli', the Committee
refused to place reliance on these validity certificates. The
Committee also observed that the petitioner failed to establish
her affinity with 'Koli Mahadev', Scheduled Tribe and, therefore,
her claim was invalidated.
*3* wp586o25 mk
5. Advocate Jadhav for the petitioner vehemently
submitted that the petitioner's claim ought to have been validated
in view of ample documentary evidence filed on record. The
main thrust of his argument is on the validity certificates in
favour of the petitioner's close blood relatives i.e. real uncle
Balaji Bhanudas Koli, who was granted validity by the
Committee on 19.09.2019 and validity of her real brother
Samarth Sharad Koli and real cousin sister Madhura Balaji Koli
who were granted validity certificates dated 05.08.2024 pursuant
to the order dated 31.07.2024 passed by this Court in Writ
Petition No.7590/2024. In view of these validities of close blood
relatives, the petitioner's claim needs to be validated. It is
submitted that the vigilance cell enquiry report in the matter of
the petitioner's real brother Samarth Sharad Koli and cousin
sister Madhura Balaji Koli was referred to and relied upon while
deciding the petitioner's claim and in view of the validities in
favour of Samarath and Madhura, the petitioner is also entitled
for validation of her claim.
6. Advocate R.K. Ingole, the learned AGP for the
respondents/ State, opposed the petition and submitted that
*4* wp586o25 mk
burden to prove tribe claim has to be discharged by the candidate
independently and since the petitioner has failed to discharge the
burden on the strength of her own documents, her claim is rightly
invalidated.
7. We have considered the rival submissions and
perused the papers.
8. It is pertinent to note that there is no dispute about
the relationship of the petitioner with the above mentioned
validity holders. It is undisputed fact that the Scrutiny Committee
has relied upon the vigilance cell enquiry report in the matter of
Madhura Balaji Koli and Samarth Sharad Koli for deciding the
petitioner's tribe claim. Samarth Sharad Koli (petitioner's real
brother) and Madhura Balaji Koli (petitioner's cousin sister) have
been granted validity certificates by the Committee on
05.08.2024 pursuant to the order dated 31.07.2024 passed by this
Court in Writ Petition No.7490/2024. It has to be noted that
Madhura and Samarth had relied upon the validity of Balaji
Bhanudas Koli and they were granted validities on their
undertaking to abide by the conditions as laid down in the matter
of Shweta Balaji Isankar vs. The State of Maharashtra and
*5* wp586o25 mk
others, Writ Petition No.5611/2018 (principal seat) decided
on 27.07.2018, (2018 SCC Online Bom 10363).
9. In view of the validity certificates in favour of the
petitioner's real brother Samarth and other close blood relatives,
her claim also needs to be validated in view of the settled
position of law as laid down in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur
Jamat Swarakshan Samiti vs. The State of Maharashtra and
others, AIR 2023 SC 1657 and Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale
Vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1
Nagpur, [2010(6) Mh.L.J.401 : AIR 2010(6) Bom.R.21] .
Hence, we pass the following order:-
(a) The Writ Petition is partly allowed.
(b) The impugned order dated 03.01.2025 passed by
respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside.
(c) Respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee is directed to
immediately issue a validity certificate of 'Koli Mahadev',
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.
*6* wp586o25 mk
(e) The petitioner shall not be entitled to claim equities.
(f) No order as to costs.
10. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
kps ( PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.) ( MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)
