Bombay High Court
Krushali Dnyaneshwar Pawar And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 25 September, 2025
2025:BHC-AS:40570-DB 902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
Kartikeya
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.8931 OF 2018
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO.30779 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.8931 OF 2018
1. Kum. Krushali Dnyaneshwar Pawar
2. Lavkesh Eknath Pawar
Both aged adults, residing at Battis Shirala,
...Petitioners/
Tal. Shirala, Dist. Sangli.
Applicants
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai-400 032.
2. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee Pune through its Member
Secretary, having its office at Kapil
Towers, near RTO office, Pune-1.
3. Commissionerate and Competent Authority,
Maharashtra State, having its office at New
Excelsior Bldg. 8th, Fort, Mumbai-1.
4. Kolhapur Institute of Techonology And
Engineering (Autonomous Body) Kolhapur
Page 1 of 13
th
16 September 2025
::: Uploaded on - 25/09/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 25/09/2025 22:16:29 :::
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
through its Principal, At Kolhapur, Dist. Kolhapur.
5. College of Agriculature, Shivaji Nagar,
Pune, through its Principal, having its ...Respondents
Office at Pune.
Mr. Ramchandra K. Mendadkar, for the Petitioners/Applicants.
Mr. Ashwini A. Purav, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. Yashodeep Deshmukh a/w Ms. Vaidehi Deshmukh, for the
Respondent No.3-CET Cell.
Mrs. Rupali Andhare, Legal Officer Scrutiny Committee, present.
CORAM : SUMAN SHYAM &
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 16TH SEPTEMBER 2025.
PRONOUNCED ON : 25TH SEPTEMBER 2025.
JUDGMENT :
- (PER MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with
the consent of parties.
2. In the present Writ Petition, we are required to deal with a
peculiar situation where the impugned order dated 24.07.2018,
invalidating the Tribe claim of the Petitioners, by Respondent No.2-
Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Pune, has come
up for hearing before us after a long duration of 7 years after filing
the Writ Petition. In the meanwhile, the Tribe claim in respect of
the blood relatives of the Petitioners have been validated by the
Committee as well as by this Court.
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
3. In view of the developments that have taken place during
the intervening period, the Petitioners have filed an Interim
Application, seeking permission to amend the Writ Petition. In fact,
the Writ Petition was circulated in the wake of the allotment of a
seat in law college to the Petitioner No.1, which was subject to
production of Caste Validity Certificate and other necessary
documents. In view of the urgency expressed by the Petitioner, we
have taken up the present Writ Petition for final hearing and
disposal.
4. The factual matrix of the Writ Petition is that the Petitioners
belong to the "Thakar" Schedule Tribe. They have been issued the
Caste Certificate by the competent Authority on 15.05.2011 and
17.11.2011, respectively. The Petitioners have submitted their
proposal for caste verification to Respondent No.2-Committee
along with various documents supporting their Tribe claim. They
have relied on the Caste Validity Certificate issued in favour of
their real uncle, namely, Namdev Dinkar Pawar. The three
documents heavily relied by the Petitioners are of great probative
value, since they were issued prior to the presidential order. On
submission of their proposal, the Vigilance Report in respect of the
documents placed on record was called by Respondent No.2-
Committee. On receiving the Vigilance Report, it was furnished to
the Petitioners, in response to which they have filed their reply.
Upon filing of reply by the Petitioners, they were called for hearing
on 25.06.2006. After a long gap of 12 years, the Petitioners were
again called for hearing on 10.06.2018 and, after hearing the
Petitioners, the matter was closed for orders. The Respondent
No.2-Scrutiny Committee has invalidated their Tribe claim vide
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
impugned order dated 24.07.2018, which, according to the
Petitioners, was received by them on 03.08.2018.
5. Admittedly, there is no interim relief granted in favour of the
Petitioners. Though the matter was listed on a few occasions, it
could not be heard. When the matter was heard by this Court on
16.09.2025, it was submitted that Petitioner No.1 has been allotted
a seat in the Bharati Vidyapeeth New Law College, Sangli
(Government Aided) but unless she submits her Caste Validity
Certificate, her admission cannot be confirmed. It is submitted
that, if the Petitioner No.1 does not submit the Caste Validity
Certificate, great prejudice will be caused to her since, she will lose
one academic year, as it is not possible for her to again obtain
admission from the Open Category.
6. In view of the urgency, we have granted liberty to the
Petitioners to file an Interim Application, to bring the subsequent
developments, that had occurred during the intervening period, on
record and also to add the concerned college as a party
Respondent. Today, the Petitioners have moved the Interim
Application, seeking permission to carry out the necessary
amendment.
7. We have heard the learned Counsel Shri. Mendadkar, for the
Petitioners. According to him, the order passed by the Scrutiny
Committee is contrary to the judicial pronouncement of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in as much as Respondent No.2-Scrutiny
Committee has non-suited the Petitioner on the ground of cultural
affinity, which is contrary to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex
Court. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held that solely on the basis of
failure in cultural affinity test, the caste claim of the candidates
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
cannot be invalidated. It is submitted that, in spite of the Caste
Validity Certificate being issued in favour of Namdev Dinkar Pawar,
who is the real uncle of the Petitioners and despite the following
pre-constitutional entries submitted in support of their claim such
as :
(i) School entry in respect of Shankar Hari Thakar dated
23.06.1920, who is the cousin great grandfather of the Petitioners;
(ii) School entry in respect of Shankar Ganpatrao Thakar dated
15.07.1941, who again is the cousin grandfather of the Petitioners;
and
(iii) Birth extract of cousin great grandfather, namely, Aba Sidhu
Babaji Thakar of the year 1926.
An adverse order has been passed ignoring those documents.
8. It is submitted that Respondent No.2-Committee has
invalidated the Tribe claim of the Petitioners, though there is no
interpolation recorded by the vigilance cell in respect of any of the
documents produced by the petitioner. Since the entries were
predominantly made in the pre-constitutional era, i.e., before
1950, it bears a great evidential value. In spite of various
documents, which clearly supported the caste claim of the
Petitioners, the Scrutiny Committee, based on the post-
constitutional documents, by relying on certain entries which
recorded the caste of the relatives of the Petitioners as Hindu
Maratha and Hindu, Thakar, their Tribe claims have been
invalidated.
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
9. The Scrutiny Committee has also ignored the Validity
Certificate earlier issued in favour of his uncle, namely, Namdev
Dinkar Pawar.
10. It is, therefore, submitted that the order dated 24.07.2018,
passed by the Scrutiny Committee is an erroneous and arbitrary
order, passed without taking into consideration the record as well
as the various judicial pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court. Hence, it is required to be quashed and set aside.
11. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has placed reliance on
the order dated 26.09.2023, passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in Writ Petition No.2344 of 2023, in the case of Shridhar
Namdev Pawar V/s. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification
Committee, Pune & Ors. [Coram : Sunil B. Shukre & Firdosh P.
Pooniwalla, JJ], wherein, this Court has directed the Scrutiny
Committee to issue Tribe Validity Certificate to the Petitioner
within a period of two weeks. Shridhar Namdev Pawar is the real
cousin brother of Petitioner No.1 and cousin brother of Petitioner
No.2.
12. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, the
documents relied upon the Petitioners in the present Writ Petition
have also been considered by this Court to hold that those two
documents, clinch the issue in favour of the Petitioners and the
genuineness of those documents is not doubted. He further relies
on one more order dated 22.07.2024, passed by a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in the case of Gaurav Namdeo Pawar V/s.
Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee & Ors.
[Coram : Nitin Jamdar & M.M. Sathaye, JJ.], in Writ Petition
No.9897 of 2024, wherein this Hon'ble Court, by quashing and
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
setting aside the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee, has
directed to issue the Caste Validity Certificate to one Gaurav
Namdeo Pawar, who again is the cousin (brother) of the
Petitioners.
13. The learned Counsel submits that the two orders passed by
this Court itself, would squarely cover the case of the Petitioners.
Considering that the blood relatives have been issued Caste
Validity Certificate, based on judicial pronouncements of this
Court, which squarely applies to the case of the Petitioners as well,
similar direction is required to be passed in this case as well.
14. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner draws support from
judgement of Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan
Samiti V/s. State of Maharashtra and Others 1, to contend that
affinity test is not an essential part in process of determination of
correctness of a Caste or Tribe claim in every case. The Petitioner,
therefore, submits that, amendment Application deserves to be
allowed for bringing the fact of issuance of Caste Validity
Certificate issued in favour of cousin brothers of the Petitioner
No.1 on record and also to add the college as a party Respondent,
for issuing directions to the college not to cancel the admission of
Petitioner No.1, in the 1st Year of 3 Years L.L.B. Degree Course, for
want of Validity Certificate.
15. Ms. Purav, learned AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 has
resisted the prayer made by the Petitioners and submitted that
though the Petitioners have relied on entries in respect of (i) great
grandfather of the Petitioners, i.e., one Shankar Hari Thakar
pertaining to the years 1920, (ii) birth extract of the year 1926 of
(2023) 16 SCC 415
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
Aba Sidhu Babaji Thakar and (iii) Shankar Ganpatrao Thakar of
the 1941, showing their caste as "Thakar", yet, it needs to be
appreciated that entry in respect of one of the great grandfather of
the Petitioners namely Shankar Hari Thakar pertaining to the year
1914 reflects his caste as "Marathe". There are few more entries
pertaining to the pre-constitutional era, which shows entries of the
blood relatives of the Petitioners as "Marathe". Even the post-
constitutional entries of the blood relatives of the Petitioners are
Hindu Maratha, Hi. Maratha, Hi. Thakar and Non BC. There are
various contra entries of the blood relatives of the Petitioners,
which do not support the case of the Petitioners.
16. She further submits that in addition to the contra entries,
the Petitioners have failed to prove the cultural affinity with
Thakar Scheduled Tribe. They have also failed to prove the traits,
customs, traditions, occupation, etc peculiar to their Tribe. It is
found that their claim of Thakar Scheduled Tribe is not genuine. It
is observed by the Committee that even the lifestyle of the
Petitioners is quite distinct from the lifestyle of the genuine Thakar
Scheduled Tribe. Considering that the Petitioners have failed in
affinity test and the contra entries recorded during the Vigilance
Inquiry, the prayer of the Petitioners does not deserve any
consideration.
17. Mr. Deshmukh, learned Counsel for Respondent No.3-
Commissioner and Competent Authority, Maharashtra State (CET
Cell) has opposed the Interim Application for amendment to
submit that in fact, Petitioner No.1 has not been allotted any seat
in the Bharati Vidyapeeth New Law College, Sangli (Government
Aided) as claimed by her. The document relied upon by Petitioner
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
No.1 to claim that she has been allotted college and upon her
submission of Caste Validity Certificate, the admission will be
confirmed is not correct. The document relied upon by the
Petitioner No.1 is a provisional allotment letter, whereby a seat is
offered to the Petitioner No.1 in the Bharati Vidyapeeth New Law
College, Sangli. According to him, in fact, since Petitioner No.1 did
not make necessary compliance for confirmation of her admission,
the concerned seat has already been allotted to some other
candidate in the next round. Therefore, the prayer of the
Petitioners for issuing directions to the Respondent-College not to
cancel the admission of Petitioner No.1 on the ground of non-
submission of Caste Validity Certificate does not survive.
18. So far as the merits of the matter are concerned, it is
submitted that the role of CET Cell is restricted only to the extent
of regulating the admission of the students to professional courses.
Therefore, it is not within the competence of the Respondent No.3-
CET Cell to make submissions on the merits of the impugned order
in the Writ Petition.
19. We have heard the respective Counsel at length. The prayer
of Petitioner No.1 to the extent of protecting her admission to
proposed Respondent No.4-College would not survive in view of
the statement made by learned Counsel for Respondent No.3-CET
Cell.
20. Upon perusal of the two orders passed by this Court in
Shridhar Namdev Pawar (supra) [Writ Petition No.2344 of 2023]
and in Gaurav Namdeo Pawar (supra) [Writ Petition No.9897 of
2024], we find that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has
considered the documents placed on record by the respective
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
Petitioners to hold that these being the oldest documents, are
having a probative value and there is no doubt about genuineness
of those documents.
21. The Petitioners in the aforementioned two Writ Petitions are
the real cousin brothers of the Petitioner No.1 and second cousin
of Petitioner No.2, as can be seen from the Genealogy of the Family
placed on record. The Genealogy shows that the father of
Petitioner No.1 Dyaneshwar and Namdev, who holds a Validity
Certificate, are brothers inter se. So far as Petitioner No.2-Lavkesh
is concerned, the father of Namdev, i.e., one Dinkar and
grandfather of Lavkesh, i.e., one Shankar, are brothers inter se.
Namdev is also the father of the Petitioners in the two Writ
Petitions filed by Shridhar and Gaurav. Since the Genealogy of the
Family is not disputed, the blood relation of the Petitioners is
established with the validity holders.
22. From the Genealogy, it is evident that the Petitioners in the
present Writ Petition are blood relatives of the Petitioners in the
aforementioned two Writ Petitions. Both the Petitioners in the
aforementioned two Writ Petitions have been issued with a Tribe
Validity Certificate and they are enjoying the status of Thakar
Scheduled Tribe.
23. This Court in Shridhar Namdev Pawar (supra) has dealt with
the merits of the order of Scrutiny Committee and only upon being
satisfied that the Petitioner belongs to Thakar Scheduled Tribe has
allowed the Writ Petition. On the basis of the order in Shridhar
Namdev Pawar (supra), the same view has been followed by this
Court in Gaurav Namdeo Pawar (supra) vide order dated
22.07.2024. When we had made a pointed query to the learned
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 as to whether the order passed in
the case of Shridhar Namdev Pawar (supra) has been challenged
before the Hon'ble Apex Court, it is informed that the said order
has not been challenged.
24. In view of the fact that there are two orders passed by this
Court granting Validity Certificate in favour of the cousin brothers,
that have attained finality, we do not find any reason to take a
different view in the matter. Apart from the orders passed by this
Court in respect of two cousin brothers of the Petitioners, the
Validity issued in favour of uncle Namdev Dinkar Pawar also
supports the case of the Petitioners. If impugned order is not set
aside, the Petitioner would be shown to be belonging to a different
caste than that of their uncle and cousin brothers. As a result, they
would be treated differently, from their blood relatives and then
deprived of benefits of reservation.
25. In such a situation, it would be apposite to draw support
from the reported Judgment in the case of Apoorva D/o Vinay
Nichale V/s. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1
& Ors.2, wherein this Court has taken a view that, during the
course of enquiry, if the candidate submits a Caste Validity
Certificate granted earlier certifying that a blood relation of
candidate belong 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 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 Petitioner before it.
2010 SCC OnLine Bom 1053
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
26. In the present case, though Validity Certificate of uncle was
produced by the Petitioners, it has been discarded by the
Committee, without recording any findings about the certificate
being tainted by fraud or granted without jurisdiction. The matters
pertaining to Validity of Caste have a great impact on candidate as
well as on the future generations in many facets of life varying
from marriage to education and enjoyment of other benefits of
reservation. Therefore, when a Committee has once given a finding
about the validity of the caste of a candidate, another Committee
should not refuse the same status to a blood relative who applies.
Merely taking a different view on the same facts would not entitle
the Committee dealing with the subsequent caste claim to reject it.
27. In view of the aforementioned binding precedent of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court, which is followed in numerous decisions
of this Court, we find that the view taken by this Court in Shridhar
Namdev Pawar (supra) and Gaurav Namdeo Pawar (supra) is
required to be followed in the present Writ Petition. Since the
orders passed by this Court in the the aforementioned cases are not
subjected to any challenge, therefore, without further going into
the merits of the matter and considering the binding orders passed
by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the order passed by
Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee needs to be quashed and set
aside. However, considering the fact that the Scrutiny Committee
did not have the benefit of the view taken by this Court in Shridhar
Namdev Pawar (supra) and Gaurav Namdeo Pawar (supra), it
would be appropriate to remand the matter to Respondent No.2-
Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Pune, to pass
appropriate orders in the light of the orders passed by this Court in
th
16 September 2025
902-IA(ST)-30779-2025 (FCJ).DOCX
Shridhar Namdev Pawar (supra) and Gaurav Namdeo Pawar
(supra), as well as in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Apoorva D/o Vinay Nichale (supra)
and Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti
(supra).
28. Hence, the impugned order dated 24.07.2018, passed by
Respondent No.2-Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Pune, is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to
the Scrutiny Committee for taking a fresh decision in the matter, as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks
from the date of this order.
29. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
30. In view of the disposal of the Writ Petition, the Interim
Application stands disposed of.
(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (SUMAN SHYAM, J.)
{
th
16 September 2025
