High Court · 2024
Legal Reasoning
1 951.WP-1598-2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Writ Petition No. 1598 Of 2024With Civil Application No.7597 Of 2024In Writ Petition No. 1598 Of 2024Ganesh Maruti YemulvadAge : 41 years, Occ. Service,R/o : NarnaliTq. Khandar, Dist. Nanded. ...Petitioner Versus1.The State of Maharashtra,Trough its Principal Secretary,Tribal Development DepartmentMantralaya, Mumbai-32.2.The Scheduled Tribe Certificate VerificationCommittee, AurangabadThrough its Member Secretary.3.The Education Officer (Primary),Zilla Parishad, Parbhani,Dist. Parbhani.4.The Secretary/HeadmasterShri. Narsing Shikshan PratishthanC/o Netaji Prathmik Vidyalya Sevak Nagar,Parbhani, Dist. Parbhani. ...Respondents _ _ _ Mr. Sanket S. Kulkarni and Mr. M.B. Karande, Advocate forthe Petitioner.Mr. A.R. Kale, Addl.GP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2/State.Mr. B.A. Shinde, Advocate for Respondent No.3 _ _ _ 2 951.WP-1598-2024.doc CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.. DATE : 29 AUGUST 2024 FINAL ORDER [Per: Shailesh P. Brahme, J.] :.Heard both the sides finally considering exigency in thematter.2.The petitioner is challenging the judgment and order dated04.12.2023 passed by the Scrutiny Committee, invalidating histribe certificate of ‘Koli Malhar’ Scheduled Tribe.3.Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that thoughthere was cogent material in the form of school record ofpetitioner’s father and other relatives, the tribe claim wasarbitrarily rejected. He would further submit that in reply filed tothe vigilance report, petitioner had denied any relationship withthe persons whose old record was pitted against him statingtheir tribe to be Koli. 4.Learned Counsel would further submit that the Committeeconsidered irrelevant record. List of the relatives and thedocuments procured in the vigilance report were inconsistent.He would submit that the petitioner’s grandfather was Tukaramand therefore record in the name of Khanderao should havebeen discarded. The school record of petitioner’s father of theyear 1984, was never confronted to him so as to accord anyopportunity to explain it. Lastly, it is contended that theimpugned judgment and order is liable to be quashed and setaside. 3 951.WP-1598-2024.doc 5.Learned AGP supports the impugned judgment and orderby placing on record the original papers of the petitioner as wellas papers of Shradha and Nandkumar. He would submit that novalidity certificate was ever issued to the relatives of thepetitioner. The oldest record is of 1962 which is of caste ‘Koli’. Itfurther reveals that school record of Khanderao showing caste asKoli Mahadev was reported to be manipulated. There was nocogent material produced by the petitioner to corroborate histribe claim and the Committee has arrived at proper decision. 6.We have considered the rival submissions advanced acrossthe bar. The petitioner is not relying upon any validity certificatebut banking his claim on the documentary evidence of himself,father and relatives namely Satish, Mukesh and Shamsundar.The entry in the school record of his father of 1978 is relied on.As against that during the vigilance inquiry, the incompatibleschool record of petitioner’s father, uncle and cousins wasdiscovered. Out of that his father’s school record indicated casteas Koli, as under :Sr. No.School NameCasteDate of Admission1Z.P. Pre-Primary School, Bairly, Taluka Mukhed,Dist. Nanded.Koli24.07.19642Z.P. Pre Primary School, Bairly, Taluka Mukhed,Dist. Nanded.Koli29.06.19847.It further reveals during the vigilance inquiry that theschool record of cousin uncle – Narayan and Baburao wasindicative of caste – Koli which is oldest one, that of 1962.Besides that the manipulation in the school record of Ram, 4 951.WP-1598-2024.doc Vimal, Pundlik and Khanderao was noticed. Following are thoseentries :Sr.No.School NameStudentsRelationshipwith PetitionerCasteDate ofAdmission1Z.P. C.P. School, Kumtha,Ahmedpur.Narayanrao Manikrao YamalwadCousin UncleKoli17.07.19622Z.P. C.P. School, Kumtha,Ahmedpur.Baburao KishanraoYamalwadCousin UncleKoli17.07.19623Z.P. Pre Primary School,Bairly, Taluka Mukhed,Dist. Nanded.Govind Tukaram NarnadekarUncleKoli10.07.19694Z.P. Pre Primary School,Bairly, Taluka Mukhed,Dist. Nanded.Ramesh Maruti YamulwadCousinKoli5Z.P. Pre Primary School,Bairly, Taluka Mukhed,Dist. Nanded.Sanjay Maruti YamulwadCousinKoli8.The report was served upon the petitioner and his replywas solicited. We have gone through the reply. The entry of hisfather of 29.061984 is disputed. But the school entry of hisfather of 24.07.1964 has not been disputed which is Koli. It issubmitted that the entry of caste Koli be treated as either KoliMalhar or Koli Mahadev. In the Constitution (Scheduled Tribe)Orders, 1950, Part IX – Maharashtra, following are the relevantentries :29 Koli Mahadev, Dongar Koli30 Koli Malhar .As against above entries, Koli is included as OtherBackward Classes at Serial No.55. Only Koli Malhar and KoliMahadev are the scheduled tribes. They are included in differententries. Koli can never be treated as either Koli Malhar or KoliMahadev. 5 951.WP-1598-2024.doc 9.We find that the petitioner failed to give satisfactoryexplanation for the contrary entries. Rather contrary entry of hisfather of 24.071964, has been admitted. The Committee hasrightly recorded that the school record of blood relatives of thepetitioner is incompatible with the tribe claim especially theoldest record of 1962 of Narayan and Baburao.10.It reveals from the vigilance inquiry that NandkumarKhanderao is the cousin of the petitioner and Shradda is hisdaughter. Their tribe certificates were invalidated by theCommittee. Their record was available, from which the schoolentry of Khanderao of 1952 was traced. It was found to bebogus. It is the plea of the petitioner that Khanderao is notrelated to him. Learned AGP has made available original papersof Nandkumar and Shradda. The comparison of the genealogy inthe present matter with the genealogy of Nandkumar’s mattershows that the petitioner is lineal descendent of branch of Balajiand Khanderao is falling in the branch of Santuka. Balaji andSantuka are real brothers and sons of Appaji. ThoughKhanderao is not grandfather of the petitioner, but certainly he iswithin the blood relationship.11.From the files of Nandkumar and Shradda, the colouredphotocopy of school record of Khanderao is shown by thelearned AGP. It reveals that entry of Khanderao is objectionableand the finding recorded by the Committee in respect of saidentry cannot be said to be preverse. This bogus record
Decision
6 951.WP-1598-2024.doc discovered during the vigilance has been rightly appreciated bythe Committee.12.The date of birth of Khanderao appears to be 16.05.1947.In the year 1952-1953, he was admitted to the Pre-PrimarySchool and on 20.04.1954 shown to have passed 3rd standardwhich is logically not possible.13.From the files of Shradda and Nandkumar, the revenueentries of Santuka and his sons were recovered which disclosedcaste as Koli of 1951 Fasli. Due to such contrary record no faultcan be found with the Committee in discarding the claim.14.Pertinently, the petitioner could not get through the affinitytest. The oldest record available is against him. There is noconvincing material to support the tribe claim of the petitioner.We have no hesitation to hold that the Committee has arrived atjust conclusion which is plausible. We, therefore, find nosubstance in the writ petition.15.The writ petition is dismissed.16.In view of disposal of the petition, nothing survives in thecivil application. The same is disposed of. SHAILESH P. BRAHME MANGESH S. PATIL JUDGE JUDGENajeeb..