Mr. S. C. Yeramwar, Advocate for the v. M. Jaware, AGP for
Legal Reasoning
(1) wp-2215-2021.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADWRIT PETITION NO.2215 OF 2021Akshada d/o Suresh Navasare,Age- 19 years, Occ. Student,R/o At- Anand Khede, Post- Khede,Tq. & Dist. Dhule...PetitionerVersus1.The State of MaharashtraDepartment of Tribal Development,Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.Through its Secretary.2.The Scheduled Tribe Certificate ScrutinyCommittee, Nashik Division, Nashik,Through its Member Secretary.3.State Common Entrance Test Cell,Maharashtra State, 8th Floor,New Excelsior Building, A.K. Nayak Road,Fort, Mumbai- 400001.Through its Commissioner & Competent Authority...Respondents …Mr. S. C. Yeramwar, Advocate for the Petitioner.Mr. V. M. Jaware, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.Mr. M. D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No.3. … CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.JUDGMENT RESERVED ON :- 19th JANUARY 2024.JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON :- 02nd FEBRUARY 2024.JUDGMENT (Per: S. G. Chapalgaonkar, J.):- 1.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent ofthe parties, matter is taken up for final hearing at the stage ofadmission.2.The petitioner approaches this Court under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India, thereby impugning order dated 18.01.2021
Legal Reasoning
(2) wp-2215-2021.odtpassed by respondent no.2-Scheduled Tribe Certificate ScrutinyCommittee, Nashik thereby invalidating the caste claim of thepetitioner as belonging to ‘Tokre Koli’, Scheduled Tribe.3.Mr. Yeramwar, learned Advocate appearing for thepetitioner submits that the petitioner belongs to the ‘Tokre Koli’,Scheduled Tribe. On 19.09.2017 the Sub Divisional Officer/CompetentAuthority has issued a caste certificate in favour of the petitionercertifying her as belonging to ‘Tokre Koli’, Scheduled Tribe. In the year2018 her tribe certificate was referred to respondent no.2-Committee forverification through her college. It was supported by the certificates ofvalidity issued in favour of blood relatives, school admission entries andrevenue record depicting caste entry as ‘Tokre Koli’, Scheduled Tribe.The proposal of the petitioner was referred to the vigilance enquiry.The report dated 30.03.2019 was received to the Committee, which wasserved to the petitioner alongwith show cause notice dated 04.06.2019.The petitioner duly explained adverse remarks vide her reply dated11.06.2019. However, the Committee vide order dated 11.07.2019invalidated tribe claim. Petitioner had approached this Court vide WritPetition No.13874/2019 challenging such invalidation. She had alsotendered additional documents in support of her caste claim alongwithCivil Application No.6745/2020. This Court was pleased to relegate thematter to the Committee for fresh consideration vide order dated11.12.2020. The Committee had again directed vigilance enquiry,particularly in respect of the additional documents. The report of thevigilance was received to the Committee and adverse remarks thereinwere duly replied by the petitioner. However, the Committee againinvalidated the petitioner’s caste claim.4.Mr. Yeramwar would submit that there are two validityholders among the blood relations of the petitioner. The cousin uncle ofthe petitioner namely Vikas Ramdas Navasare has been granted (3) wp-2215-2021.odtvalidity certificate dated 18.12.2008. His another cousin uncle namelyNarendra Ramdas Navasare is granted caste validity on 28.06.2012.Both the aforesaid validity are intact and there is no dispute as regardsto the genealogy depicting blood relations of the petitioner with thevalidity holders. He would further submit that the document dated25.12.1905 in respect of great great grandfather of the petitionernamely Maharu Budha Kalu was placed on record, it notes his caste as‘Koli Dhor’,. He would further submit that this Court vide order dated10.01.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.153/2022 directed the Committeeto issue validity certificate in favour of Nandini d/o Kishor Navsare,who is cousin of the petitioner.5.Mr. Jaware, learned AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2vehemently opposes the petition and submits that the claim of thepetitioner has been invalidated for want of sufficient materialsupporting caste claim. The Committee recorded its conclusion afterconsidering entire material on record as well as findings of the vigilancecell. There are many contra entries that nullifies the evidence reliedupon by the petitioner.6.We have considered the submissions advanced by thelearned Advocates appearing for the respective parties. We have gonethrough the voluminous documents annexed to the petition. The casteclaim of the petitioner is mainly supported by the two validity grantedto blood relations i.e. Vikas Ramdas Navasare and Narendra RamdasNavasare. Admittedly, both the aforesaid validity are still intact. TheCommittee has not issued any show cause notice to both the validityholders. No proceeding for revocation of such validity have ever beeninitiated. The Committee considered both these validity in paragraphno.11 of the impugned order. The Committee records that first validityholder i.e. Vikas Ramdas Navasare has not filed his affidavitacknowledging relationship with the petitioner. We have verified the (4) wp-2215-2021.odtuncontraverted genealogy, which is part of the record of the Committee.We noticed that Budha is great-great-great-grandfather of thepetitioner. He had four sons namely Sakharam, Narayan, Mahru andTanaji. The petitioner belongs to the branch of Maharu BudhaNavasare, wheres Vikas hails from the branch of Tanaji. Apparently,we do not find any reason to disbelieve the contentions of the petitioneras regards to her relationship with Vikas. So far as the second bloodrelative namely Narendra Ramdas Navasare is concerned, theCommittee simply notes that no vigilance was carried while issuingvalidity in his favour. Pertinently, Vikas and Narendra are realbrothers. The validity was issued in favour of Vikas Ramdas Navasareon 18.12.2008, whereas Narendra Ramdas Navasare received validitycertificate on 28.06.2012. In such case, it was not necessary for theCommittee to refer the case of Narendra to the vigilance. Therefore,reasoning adopted by the Committee while discarding aforesaid twovalidity certificates supporting the caste claim of the petitioner cannotbe approved. 7.The Committee has further recorded that the contra entrieswere not brought to the notice of the Committee at Thane, who issuedvalidity in favour of Vikas and Narendra. Pertinently, the Committeehas not formed any opinion that the validity granted to Vikas andNarendra were outcome of the fraud or misrepresentation. In thisbackground, we have no hesitation to hold that finding of theCommittee is perverse and unsustainable. 8.The petitioner has further relied upon the order passed bythis Court in the matter of Nandini d/o Kishor Navsare in Writ PetitionNo.153/2022. However, genealogy relied by the petitioner in this casedo not establish relationship of the petitioner with Nandini d/o KishorNavsare. However, in view of the aforesaid observations, committeecould have relied on validity granted to Vikas and Narendra and (5) wp-2215-2021.odtvalidated claim of petitioner, hence, impugned order is liable to bequashed and set aside and the petitioner is entitled for the reliefs asclaimed in the petition. Hence, we proceed to pass following order:-ORDERa.Writ Petition is allowed.b.The impugned order dated 18.01.2021 passed by respondentno.2-Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nashik therebyinvalidating tribe claim of the petitioner is hereby quashed and setaside.c.The respondent no.2-Committee is directed to issue castevalidity certificate in favour of the petitioner for ‘Tokre Koli’, ScheduledTribe within a period of one month from the date of this order.d.Writ Petition is disposed of.e.Rule is made absolute in above terms. (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI) JUDGE JUDGEDevendra/Feburary-2024