Bombay High Court

Vivek Sunil Chavan And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its ... on 15 October, 2025

2025:BHC-AS:44992-DB                                            905 WP 12941 OF 2023(FCJ).DOC




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 12941 OF 2023

                 1.     Vivek S/o. Sunil Chavan,
                        Age - 32 years, Occup. : - Nil.
                 2.     Sagar S/o. Sunil Chavan,
                                                                                  ...Petitioners
                        Age - 31 years, Occup. : Nil.
                        Both R/o. Akole (Bk), Taluka - Madha,
                        District - Solapur - 413 211.

                                 Versus

                 1.     The State of Maharashtra
                        Through its Principal Secretary,
                        Tribal Development Department,
                        Mantralaya, Mumbai.
                 2.     The Schedule Tribe Caste Certificate
                        Verification Committee, Pune Division,
                        Pune.
                 3.     The Principal                                          ...Respondents
                        Vitthalrao Shinde Arts College,
                        Tembhurni, Taluka - Madha,
                        District - Solapur - 413 211.
                 4.     The Principal
                        Janta Vidyalaya and Junior College,
                        Tembhurni, Taluka - Madha,
                        District - Solapur - 413 211.


                 Mr. Shrivallabh Panchpor a/w. Ms. Apeksha Jadhav, advocate for
                       the Petitioners.
                 Mrs. Ashwini A. Purav, AGP, for State-Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.




                                                 Page 1 of 10
                                                 th
                                               15 October 2025
                 Rajeshri Aher

                ::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2025                       ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2025 21:53:04 :::
                                                 905 WP 12941 OF 2023(FCJ).DOC




                    CORAM:                SUMAN SHYAM &
                                          MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.
                    RESERVED ON :         9TH OCTOBER 2025.
                    PRONOUNCED ON:        15TH OCTOBER, 2025.

 JUDGMENT (PER : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.):

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The matter is taken

up for final hearing with the consent of the parties.

2. By this Writ Petition, the Petitioners are challenging the

order passed by the Respondent No.2-Scheduled Tribe Certificate

Verification Committee, Pune, thereby invalidating their Tribe

Claim vide judgment and order dated 31st January, 2023.

3. The Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 respectively, were pursuing their

degree courses in the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 colleges. The

Petitioners have submitted various documents in support of their

Tribe claim of belonging to the "Thakar" Scheduled Tribe. One of

such old document is the School Leaving Certificate of their

grandfather, containing his birth extract dated 16 th June, 1944,

which records his caste as, "Hindu-Thakar".

4. One more document in respect of their grand uncle

maintained by the Tahasil Office, Madha showing his date of birth

th 15 October 2025 Rajeshri Aher

905 WP 12941 OF 2023(FCJ).DOC

as 30th May, 1934 and caste as "Thakar", is also produced on record

by the Petitioners. Their applications are supported with a Caste

Validity Certificate issued in favour of their cousin brother Krishna

Baban Chavan.

5. The Competent Authority has issued a Tribe Certificate in

favour of Petitioners certifying them as belonging to "Thakar"

Scheduled Tribe. The Respondent Nos.3 and 4 colleges have

forwarded the proposal for verification of the Petitioners' Tribe

Claim to the Respondent No.2 - Committee on 2 nd March, 2015

and 11th May, 2022, respectively.

6. The Respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee provided vigilance

cell report dated 29th September, 2022, to the Petitioners. They also

filed their reply, in response to the vigilance cell report. The

Respondent No.2-Committee again referred the matter back for re-

enquiry regarding the birth entry of their grand uncle, namely,

Narayan Krishna Chavan and caste entry of their uncle, namely,

Ramdas Dattu Krishna Thakar. The re-inquiry report was submitted

on 11th January, 2023.

th 15 October 2025 Rajeshri Aher

905 WP 12941 OF 2023(FCJ).DOC

7. The Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that, despite

the fact that there was a caste validity in their family and there was

no contra entry, the Respondent NO.2-Committee has passed an

order dated 31st January, 2023, rejecting the Tribe claim of the

Petitioner's by holding that, they do not belong to Scheduled Tribe

"Thakar" community. He has drawn our attention to the

observations made by the Respondent No.2-Committee in respect

of Krushna Baban Chavan, who is the validity holder in the family.

The Committee has admitted that Krushna has been issued validity

certificate on 4th June, 2005 on the basis of an inquiry conducted

by the Vigilance Cell in case of his cousin, namely, Deepak Suresh

Chavan. It is observed by the Committee that, upon perusal of the

original record of Deepak Chavan, it is found that there are entries

of "Hindu Thakar" and "Hindu Thakur" in the documents produced

by him. Similarly, during inquiry of revenue record was found that

the sale deeds dated 1923 and 1926 reflected caste, "Marathi

Thakar" and "Thakur" respectively. The learned advocate submits

that both the sale deeds are not public documents. Therefore,

reliance on the caste entries made in the sale deeds could not have

been relied upon by the Committee.

th 15 October 2025 Rajeshri Aher

905 WP 12941 OF 2023(FCJ).DOC

8. The learned advocate further submits that, the finding of the

Committee regarding failure in affinity test is also contrary to the

recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs. State of

Maharashtra and Ors.1, The Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph

no.40 has made following observations, which read as under :

"40. Thus, to conclude, we hold that:

40.1. Only when the Scrutiny Committee after holding an enquiry is not satisfied with the material produced by the applicant, the case can be referred to vigilance cell. While referring the case to vigilance cell, the Scrutiny Committee must record brief reasons for coming to the conclusion that it is not satisfied with the material produced by the applicant. Only alter a case is referred to the vigilance cell for making enquiry, an occasion for the conduct of affinity test will arise.

40.2. For the reasons which we have recorded, affinity test cannot be conclusive either way. When an affinity test is conducted by the vigilance cell, the result of the test along with all other material on record having probative value will have to be taken into consideration by the Scrutiny Committee for deciding the caste validity claim; and

40.3. In short, affinity test is not a litmus test to decide a caste claim and is not an essential part in the process of the determination of correctness of a caste or tribe claim in every case."

1 2023 SCC 326.

th 15 October 2025 Rajeshri Aher

905 WP 12941 OF 2023(FCJ).DOC

In the aforementioned Judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has

held that, the validity of the caste claim cannot be denied on the

ground of failure to establish affinity with the caste/tribe.

9. It is also submitted that the genealogy produced on record

by the Petitioner has not been disputed. From the genealogy, it is

evident that Krushna Baban Chavan is the blood relative of the

Petitioners.

10. Per contra, learned AGP appearing for the Respondents has

submitted that, the document at Serial No.1 in the table of the

impugned order, refers to school entries showing the birth entry of

one Ambadas Krushna Chavan, who is the grand father of the

Petitioners reflecting his caste as "Hindu Thakar". According to her,

"Hindu Thakar" is a contra entry. She also relied on revenue entry

of second cousin of the Petitioners, namely, Devidas Dattu Thakar,

reflecting his Caste as " Maratha".

11. As regards validity issued in favour of Krishna Baban

Chavan, it is submitted that while issuing validity in his favour it

was based on a cryptic vigilance enquiry conducted in respect of

their cousin brother Deepak Suresh Chavan. However, while

th 15 October 2025 Rajeshri Aher

905 WP 12941 OF 2023(FCJ).DOC

conducting the vigilance inquiry of the Petitioners, certain entries

showing the caste of their relatives, as "Maratha", were found,

particularly, an entry in the revenue record dated 27 th June, 1949

in respect of Devidas Dattu Thakar, does not support the claim of

the Petitioners. The Petitioners have also failed in the affinity test.

Hence, they have unequivocally failed to establish that they belong

to, "Thakar" Scheduled Tribe. The learned AGP has also produced

the original record for the perusal of this Court, for assisting to

pass appropriate orders.

12. We have heard the respective parties, perused the original

record and have gone through the writ petition containing the

impugned order. On perusal of the impugned order, as well as the

original record, we find that there is already validity holder in the

blood relation of the Petitioners i.e. Shri Krishna Baban Chavan.

His validity certificate is produced on record and the genuineness

of the certificate is not disputed. Similarly, the relation with the

validity holder is also not denied by the Respondents. Upon perusal

of the genealogy, we find that the Petitioners and the validity

holder Krishna Baban share a common ancestor i.e. great

grandfather Krishna Sakharam Thakar. Hence, it establishes their

th 15 October 2025 Rajeshri Aher

905 WP 12941 OF 2023(FCJ).DOC

blood relationship. Their genealogy is not disputed by the

Respondents. Once a validity certificate is granted in favour of the

blood relatives, the same benefits are required to be extended to

other blood relatives as well, which is settled legal position, as has

been held by this Court in various judicial pronouncements, more

particularly, in the reported judgment of Apoorva D/o. Vinay

Nichale Vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1

and Ors.2 Paragraph No.7 of the said judgment reads thus:

"7. We thus come to the conclusion that when during the course of enquiry the candidate submits a caste validity certificate granted earlier certifying that a blood relation of the candidate belongs to the same caste as that claimed by the applicant, the committee may grant such certificate without calling for Vigilance Cell Report. However, if the committee finds that the earlier caste certificate is tainted by fraud or is granted without jurisdiction, the Committee may refuse to follow and may refuse to grant certificate to the applicant before it."

Hence, once validity is granted to a blood relative, the benefit of the same is required to be extended to the other blood relatives, unless it is proved that the validity so issued suffers from fraud and misrepresentation. In the present case, there is no such observation made by the Committee alleging any fraud or misrepresentation against Krushna Baban

2 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 1053

th 15 October 2025 Rajeshri Aher

905 WP 12941 OF 2023(FCJ).DOC

Chavan. Therefore, same benefits needs to be extended even to the Petitioners.

13. In view of the aforementioned legal position, there remains

no doubt that the observation made by the Scrutiny Committee

regarding the validity certificate already issued in favour of Krishna

Baban Chavan is erroneous and contrary to the legal position

declared by this Court. More particularly in view of the fact that

the Committee has not issued any show cause notice to Krushna

Baban Chavan has reopened the validity issued in his favour.

14. Therefore, in view of the fact that the validity issued in