[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Shri. Anshu Pradeep Gudhewar vs The Scheduled Tribe Certificate ... on 12 January, 2026
Author: M.S. Jawalkar
Bench: M.S. Jawalkar
2026:BHC-NAG:542-DB
Judgment 1 J-WP No.2735.2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 2735 OF 2024
Shri. Anshu Pradeep Gudhewar,
Aged about 19 years, Occ.- Student,
Ongoing Education, BE, Mechanical
Engineering, R/o. Plot No.280/B
Near Gajanan Mandir, New Balaji Nagar
(Parvati Nagar) Nagpur, Maharashtra -
440027, M. 7499125310,
[email protected]
.... PETITIONER
// VERSUS //
1) The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Gondia
Through its Member Secretary,
Collector office, Gondia - 441614
[email protected]
2) The K. D. K. College of Engineering,
Through its Principal,
Great Nag Road, Nandanwan
Nagpur - 440009.
[email protected]
.... RESPONDENTS
______________________________________________________________
Mr. N. D. Jambhule, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mrs. Mrunal Naik, Assistant Government Pleader for
the Respondent No.1.
Ms. Mahak Agrawal, Advocate holding for Mr. A. J. Pathak,
Advocate for the Respondent No.2.
______________________________________________________________
CORAM : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, AND
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 12th JANUARY, 2026.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)
Judgment 2 J-WP No.2735.2024.odt
1. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned
Counsel for the Respondents.
2. RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
3. By this Petition, the Petitioner is challenging the order
dated 22/09/2023, passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Gondia, thereby invalidating the tribe claim
of the petitioner belonging to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe.
4. The Petitioner placed on record many documents
including following documents prior to 1950 :
Sr. Nature of Name Relation with Caste Date/year
No. document the petitioner
1 P1 Raoji Bapu Vald Great Great Mana 1919-20
Bandobast Vyankatrao Bapu grandfather
Misal Jamidar
2 Birth Daji Mana Great Mana 18/1/1927
Extract grandfather
3 P6 Daji Bapu Great Mana 1948-49
Jamabandi Nambardar, Saouji grandfather
S/o Raoji Bapu
Mana
5. The petitioner has also placed on record validity
certificates issued in favour of his father Pradip Vishwanath
Judgment 3 J-WP No.2735.2024.odt
Gudhewar, his real brother Ankush Pradip Gudhewar and his real
sister Ankita Pradip Gudhewar.
6. Per contra, the learned Counsel for Scrutiny
Committee contended that, the petitioner failed to prove his tribe
claim by way of documentary evidence as blood relative's entries
of caste is recorded as 'Mani'. It is further contended that in view
of Section 8 of the Maharashtra Act No.XXIII of 2001, the burden
of proving the caste claim squarely lies on the petitioner, which he
has failed to discharge. Accordingly, the respondents submit that
the order passed by the respondent No.1-Scrutiny Committee is
just, proper, and based on the material available on record.
7. It is pertinent to note that that validity certificate
issued in favour of father of the petitioner i.e. Pradip Vishwanath
Gudhewar is concerned, it was issued after due vigilance inquiry.
The oldest document which is placed on record by the petitioner
is of the year 1919-20, showing his great great grandfather's caste
as 'Mana' at P-1. The another document is of 1948-49 in respect of
Daji Bapu S/o Raoji Bapu, wherein the caste is shown as 'Mana'.
The Scrutiny Committee has not given any consideration to these
old documents and also has not considered the validity certificates
Judgment 4 J-WP No.2735.2024.odt
issued in favour of the father, real brother and sister of the
petitioner. The said validities are not considered only on the
ground that the then Committee issued the validity certificates on
the basis of judgment given in the cases of Shubham Sharad
Gadmade, Gitesh Narendra Ghormare, Pankaj Sitaram Bhonde,
etc., however, on perusal of the order in respect of father of the
petitioner, which is a reasoned one. The then Caste Scrutiny
Committee considered the document of 1919-20, 1931 and
subsequent documents showing entry as 'Mana' consistently,
procedure as per Rule 12(2) of the Maharashtra Scheduled Tribes
(Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Certificate Rules,
2003 is also followed and Vigilance Cell verified the genuineness
of documents. In view thereof, the Scrutiny Committee ought to
have granted the claim of the petitioner. Needless to mention here
that in view of the judgment in Apoorva D/o Vinay Nichale vs.
Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1, & Ors.,
2010(6) Mh.L.J. 401, the Caste Scrutiny Committee erroneously
rejected the claim of the Petitioner. What is held in Apoorva D/o
Vinay Nichale (supra) as under :
"9. .......... In the circumstances, we are of the
view that the committee which has expressed a
doubt about the validity of caste claim of the
petitioner and has described it as a mistake in its
Judgment 5 J-WP No.2735.2024.odt
order, ought not to have arrived at a different
conclusion. The matters pertaining to validity of
caste have a great impact on the candidate as well as
on the future generations in many matters varying
from marriage to education and enjoyment, and
therefore where a committee has given a finding
about the validity of the caste of a candidate another
committee ought not to refuse the same status to a
blood relative who applies. A merely different view
on the same facts would not entitle the committee
dealing with the subsequent caste claim to reject it.
There is, however, no doubt as observed by us
earlier that if a committee is of the view that the
earlier certificate is obtained by fraud it would not
be bound to follow the earlier caste validity
certificate and is entitled to refuse the caste claim
and also in addition initiate proceedings for
cancellation of the earlier order. In this view of the
matter, we are of the view that the petition must
succeed."
8. There are no adverse or contra entries procured by the
vigilance cell. As already held, the Caste Scrutiny Committee is
having no power to review nor it can treat validity certificate
issued in favour of blood relatives of the petitioner as illegal,
unless there is a findings of fraud or suppression of fact. There is
no such findings recorded by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. As
such, in view of the validity certificates issued in favour of father,
real brother and sister of the petitioner, the Caste Scrutiny
Committee ought to have issued the validity certificate to the
Judgment 6 J-WP No.2735.2024.odt
petitioner. The old documents prior to 1950 is having more
probative value and it cannot be simply brushed aside.
9. Thus, the order passed by the Respondent Caste
Scrutiny Committee is erroneous, perverse and cannot sustain in
the eyes of law and is liable to be quashed and set aside.
Accordingly, we proceed to pass following order :
(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 22/09/2023, passed in
case No. JC/TCSC/Gondia/1/363/36/2022, passed by
the respondent No.1 - Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Gondia is hereby quashed and set
aside.
(iii) It is declared that the Petitioner duly established that
he belongs to "Mana" Scheduled Tribe.
(iv) The Respondent Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Gondia is hereby directed to issue
the validity certificate of "Mana" Scheduled Tribe to
the Petitioner within a period of four weeks.
10. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as
to costs. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)
Signed by: Mr. B.J. Kirtak
Kirtak
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 14/01/2026 19:15:31
