Bombay High Court
Gajanan S/O Haribhau Suryawanshi vs The Vice-Chairman/Member Secretary, ... on 16 September, 2025
Author: M.S. Jawalkar
Bench: M.S. Jawalkar
2025:BHC-NAG:9241-DB
Judgment 1 wp238.23+1.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 238/2023
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 1810/2022
WRIT PETITION NO. 238/2023
(1) Kalyani D/o Gajanan
Suryawanshi,
Aged about 25 years, Occ.
Student,
(2) Komal D/o Gajanan
Suryawanshi,
Aged about 29 years, Occ.
Student,
Both R/o. Rural Colony, Shivaji
Nagar, Amravati Pin code
444603
.....PETITIONER(S)
// VERSUS //
The Vice-Chairman/Member
Secretary, Scheduled Tribe
Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Chaprashipura,
Amravati
.....RESPONDENT(S)
..𝓐..
Judgment 2 wp238.23+1.odt
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 1810/2022
Gajanan S/o Haribhau
Suryawanshi,
Aged about 57 years, Occ.
Service, R/o. Rural Colony,
Shivaji Nagar, Amravati .....PETITIONER(S)
// VERSUS //
(1) The Vice-Chairman/Member
Secretary, Scheduled Tribe
Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati
(2) The Principal,
Shivaji Science College,
Amravati
(3) The Secretary,
Shivaji Education Society,
Amravati
(4) The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary, General
Administration Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
.....RESPONDENT(S)
..𝓐..
Judgment 3 wp238.23+1.odt
●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
Ms. P.D. Rane, Advocate for the Petitioner(s)
Smt. S.S. Jachak, Addl. GP for the Respondent/State
Shri R.S. Bhoyar, Adv h/f Shri K.P. Mahalle, Adv for the
Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 in Writ Petition No. 1810/2022
●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
CORAM : M.S. JAWALKAR & RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ.
CLOSED FOR JUDGMENT ON :- SEPTEMBER 12, 2025
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON :- SEPTEMBER 16, 2025
JUDGMENT :
- (PER:- M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)
. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of learned Counsel for the respective parties.
(2) The Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1810/2022 is the
real brother of the Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 238/2023.
Since Writ Petition No. 238/2023 is treated as lead Petition, the
facts and contentions stated in the said Petition are set out for
adjudication of the issue involved in both the Petitions and they
are being decided by this common judgment.
(3) The present Petition is filed by the Petitioners
challenging the order passed by the Respondent - Scheduled
Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati
(hereinafter referred to as "the Scrutiny Committee") dated
..𝓐..
Judgment 4 wp238.23+1.odt
30/11/2022 invaliding the tribe claims of the Petitioners of
belonging to 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe.
(4) It is the claim of the Petitioners that they belong to
'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe. The proposals were forwarded to the
Scrutiny Committee on 13/02/2019 and 17/11/2019 for
verification of the tribe. On 13/10/2022, the Police Vigilance
Report came to be submitted. On the show cause notice, the
Petitioners submitted the reply to the Police Vigilance Report.
The Petitioners placed on record as many as 34 documents
showing the tribe of their blood relatives from the paternal side
as 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe. The following are the old entries
submitted by the Petitioners:-
अ. क्र कागदपत्राचे स्वरुप कागदपत्रा जमात दिनांक अर्जदारांशी
वरील व्यक्तीचे नाते
नाव
1. शाळा सोडल्याचे हरिभाऊ दत्तु ठाकु र 23.6.1947 अर्जदार क्र. 1
प्रमाणपत्र सुर्यवंशी व 2 चे
आजोवा
2. जन्म नोंद हरिभाऊ दत्तु ठाकु र 25.4.1945 अर्जदार क्र. 1
यांना एक व 2 चे
मुलगा आजोबा
झाल्याची नोंद
..𝓐..
Judgment 5 wp238.23+1.odt
3. जन्म नोंद दत्तु वल्द ठाकु र 23.10.1946 अर्जदार क्र. 1
काशीराव व 2 चे
यांना एक पंजोबा
मुलगी
झाल्याची नोंद
4. जन्म नोंद नथु यांना एक ठाकु र 29.3.1918 अर्जदार क्र. 1
मुलगी व 2 चे चुलत
झाल्याची नोंद चुलत खापर
पंजोबा
5. जन्म नोंद नथु यांना एक ठाकु र 27.8.1923 अर्जदार क्र. 1
मुलगी व 2 चे चुलत
झाल्याची नोंद चुलत खापर
पंजोबा
6. जन्म नोंद नथु याना एक ठाकु र 20.3.1926 अर्जदार क्र. 1
मुलगा व 2 चे चुलत
झाल्याची नोंद चुलत खापर
पंजोबा
7. दाखला जि. प.पु वामन नथ्थु ठाकु र 2.12.1924 अर्जदार क्र. 1
मा. शाळा सुर्यवंशी व 2 चे चुलत
गावंडगांव बु. चुलत
आजोबा
8. दाखला जि. प.पु. भानुदास नथ्थु ठाकु र 22.6.1938 अर्जदार क्र. ।
मा. शाळा सुर्यवंशी व 2 चे चुलत
गावंडगांव बु. चुलत
आजोबा
9. शाळा सोडल्याचे नारायण दत्तु ठाकु र 26.4.1946 अर्जदार क्र. 1
प्रमाणपत्र सुर्यवंशी व 2 चे चुलत
आजोबा
10. दाखल खारीज नारायण दत्तु ठाकु र 15.7.1940 अर्जदार क्र. 1
उतारा व 2 चे चुलत
आजोबा
..𝓐..
Judgment 6 wp238.23+1.odt
11. दाखला जि. प.पु. सुकदेव ठाकु र 16.4.1925 अर्जदार क्र. 1
मा. शाळा काशीराम व 2 चे चुलत
गावंडगांव बु. पंजोबा
12. जन्म नोंद देवराव ठाकु र 6.4.1946 अर्जदार क्र. 1
काशीराम व 2 चे चुलत
यांना एक चुलत
मुलगा आजोबा
रामदास
झाल्याची नोंद
13. जन्म नोद दत्तु काशीराम ठाकु र 26.4.1942 अर्जदार क।
यांना एक व 2 चे
मुलगा मधुकर पंजोबा
झाल्याची नोंद
14. जन्म नोंद सुकदेव ठाकु र 27.2.1945 अर्जदार क्र. 1
काशीराम व 2 चे चुलत
यांना एक पंजोबा
मुलगा मधुकर
झाल्याची नोंद
15. पेरेपत्रक वामन नथु ठाकु र 1946-47
ठाकु र
(5) The above entries are prior to 1950 and in all the
documents, there is entry of 'Thakur'. A validity in respect of the
uncle of the Petitioners issued by the Thane Committee is placed
on record (Page 50). It pertains to Damodar Narayan
Suryawanshi. Not only this, in view of Rule 11(2)(d)(iii), the
affidavit of the said Damodar is also filed along with the
certificate stating therein the relation of the Petitioners with the
..𝓐..
Judgment 7 wp238.23+1.odt
said Damodar. The name of Narayan Dattu, father of Damodar is
appearing in the family tree collected by the Vigilance Cell
(Page 69), so also in the family tree produced along with the
affidavit of Damodar. The family tree is reproduced as under:-
(6) In the answer to the Issue No. 8, these validity certificates
are discarded as no speaking order of Thane Committee is placed
on record. It cannot be inferred that the said certificate was
issued after conducting the due vigilance enquiry and in view
thereof, it is recorded that the benefit of the said validity
certificate cannot be granted to the Petitioners.
(7) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, in support of her
contentions, relied on the judgment in Writ Petition
..𝓐..
Judgment 8 wp238.23+1.odt
No. 5891/2022 wherein on similar grounds, the Scrutiny
Committee had not granted the benefit of the validity certificate
of the blood relatives to the Petitioners therein. This Court in
Paragraph Nos. 11 and 12 held as under:-
"11. We, however, need not go into these details as
we find that the tribe claim of the Petitioners has been
established by the Petitioners on the basis of the validity
certificate issued by Thane Scrutiny Committee in favour
of the cousin brother of the Petitioner No.2. The Scrutiny
Committee has ignored the same by stating that the Thane
Scrutiny Committee has not rendered a speaking order to
validate the claim. The Scrutiny Committee has also
expressed doubt whether the Thane Scrutiny Committee
has conducted Vigilance enquiry in the matter.
12. In our view, the Scrutiny Committee must be
mindful of the fact that it is not an appellate authority to
test correctness of the order of validation issued by the
another Scrutiny Committee. The Scrutiny Committee
while examining the caste claim or tribe claim of the
applicants is duty bound to rely upon the validity
certificate issued by the competent committee in favour of
the relatives of the applicants. The Validity Certificate can
only be ignored in the event of receiving evidence that the
validity has been obtained by playing fraud. In such cases,
the Scrutiny Committee is required to open the earlier
..𝓐..
Judgment 9 wp238.23+1.odt
case for re-examination to be done by the competent
Committee."
(8) As such, the reasons given by the Scrutiny Committee
are not sustainable for discarding the validity certificate of uncle
of the Petitioners. Another ground for invalidation of the tribe
claims is that there are three entries of 'Bhat'. First in respect of
Galwanti Kashirao dated 18/10/1912 who is the wife of great
grand father of the Petitioners. This entry cannot be considered
for invalidation of the tribe claims of the Petitioners as the same
is not in respect of the blood relative from the paternal side. The
second entry is of 06/10/1913 wherein only Kashirao is
mentioned and the entry is shown as 'Bhat' (Page 103). Insofar as
the second entry i.e. in respect of Kashirao is concerned, there is
no detail of Kashirao whether he is in blood relation with the
Petitioners. Moreover, the typed copy is not as per the scanned
copy. Therefore, this entry cannot be relied on. Insofar as the
third entry which is in respect of Dattu Kashirao is concerned,
the birth entry is mentioned as 27/12/1937. In spite of the clear
words mentioned as 'Dattu Kaka Pandit Bhat', the Scrutiny
Committee deliberately written as 'Dattu Kashirao Bhat' so as to
..𝓐..
Judgment 10 wp238.23+1.odt
invalidate the claims of the Petitioners. For the sake of
convenience, scanned copy of the said entry is reproduced as
under:-
(9) As such, all these above three entries cannot be
considered for invalidation of the tribe claims of the Petitioners.
As referred above, there are as many as 15 old entries prior to
1950 in respect of the blood relatives of the Petitioners.
(10) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners also relied on the
judgment in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan
Samiti vs. State of Maharashtra & others, 2023(2) Mh.L.J. 785,
wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court in Paragraph No. 22 held as
under:-
..𝓐..
Judgment 11 wp238.23+1.odt
"22. We can also contemplate one more scenario
which is found in many cases. These are the cases
where the applicant relies upon caste validity
certificates issued to his blood relatives. Obviously,
such a validity certificate has to be issued either by
the Scrutiny Committee constituted in terms of the
directions issued in Kumari Madhuri Patil's case1 or
constituted under the Rules framed under the 2000
Act. In such a case, firstly, the Scrutiny Committee
must ascertain whether the certificate is genuine.
Secondly, the Scrutiny Committee will have to decide
whether the applicant has established that the person
to whom the validity certificate relied upon by him
has been issued is his blood relative. For that purpose,
the applicant must establish his precise and exact
relationship with the person to whom the validity
certificate has been granted. Moreover, an enquiry
will have to be made by the Scrutiny Committee
whether the validity certificate has been granted to
the blood relative of the applicant by the concerned
Scrutiny Committee after holding due enquiry and
following due procedure. Therefore, if the Scrutiny
Committee has issued a validity certificate
contemplated in terms of the decision in the case of
Kumari Madhuri Patil1, the examination will be
whether the enquiry contemplated by the said
decision has been held. If the certificate relied upon is
issued after coming into force of the 2000 Act, the
..𝓐..
Judgment 12 wp238.23+1.odt
Scrutiny Committee will have to ascertain whether
the concerned Scrutiny Committee had followed the
procedure laid down therein as well as in the ST
Rules or the SC Rules, as the case may be. For this
verification, the Scrutiny Committee can exercise
powers conferred on it by Section 9(d) by
requisitioning the record of the concerned Caste
Scrutiny Committee, which has issued the validity
certificate to the blood relative of the applicant. If the
record has been destroyed, the Scrutiny Committee
can ascertain whether a due enquiry has been held on
the basis of the decision of the Caste Scrutiny
Committee by which caste validity has been granted
to the blood relative of the applicant. If it is
established that the validity certificate has been
granted without holding a proper inquiry or without
recording reasons, obviously, the caste scrutiny
committee cannot validate the caste certificate only
on the basis of such validity certificate of the blood
relative."
(11) Insofar as the area restriction is concerned, it is
already removed. In respect of the affinity test, in Anand vs.
Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claim &
others, (2012) 1 SCC 113, it is held that the affinity test is not a
litmus test specifically when there are so many documents prior
..𝓐..
Judgment 13 wp238.23+1.odt
to 1950 showing the persons in relation to the Petitioners as
'Thakur'. It has more probative value and weightage.
(12) Learned AGP vehemently opposed the Petition. In
support of her contention that the candidate desirous of seeking
a caste certificate shall have to apply to the Competent Authority
having jurisdiction over the area or place to which he/she or his/
her father or grandfather originally belongs or was/is an
ordinary residents or native of that place, she relied on the
judgment in Rajendra Shivram Thakur vs. State of Maharashtra,
2019 (4) Mh.L.J. 721.
(13) Insofar as the issue in the judgment in Rajendra
Thakur (supra) relied on by the learned Addl. GP is concerned,
the same has been considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti (supra).
The Scrutiny Committee has not discussed about all the old
documents wherein 'Thakur' entry is there. Thus, the findings
recorded by the Scrutiny Committee is not only erroneous but
perverse to the facts and evidence on record. Even though there
is a validity granted in favour of uncle of the Petitioners, the
Scrutiny Committee has committed gross error of jurisdiction in
..𝓐..
Judgment 14 wp238.23+1.odt
not considering the same for extraneous reasons. As such, the
impugned orders passed by the Scrutiny Committee do not
sustain the scrutiny of law, and hence, they are liable to be
quashed and set aside.
(14) Hence, we proceed to pass the following order:-
(a) The Writ Petitions are allowed.
(b) The impugned orders dated 30/11/2022 and
15/09/2021 passed the in Case Nos.
सआ/अजप्रतस/अम/5/503/Edu/122018/115549,सआ/अजप्रत
स/अम/5/503/Edu/042019/137926 and Case No. 5-
ST2013/12701 passed by the Respondent - Scheduled
Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati
are hereby quashed and set aside.
(c) It is declared that the Petitioners have established that
they belong to 'Thakur' Scheduled Tribe. The Scrutiny
Committee is directed to issue validity certificates to
the Petitioners as they belong to 'Thakur' Scheduled
Tribe, within a period of three weeks.
..𝓐..
Judgment 15 wp238.23+1.odt
(d) The Petitioners can rely on the copy of this judgment
until the validity certificates are issued to them.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Pending
Application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)
..𝓐..
