(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 1052 OF 2007 Laxman Narban Tarpewad. .. Petitioner. versus The State of Maharashtra, through Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32, & 2 others. .. Respondents. .......................... Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Tambe, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent no.1. Mr. U.S. Malte, Advocate, for respondent no.2. .......................... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.K. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 20TH JULY 2009. COURT'S ORDER : 1. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 4th April 2003, vide which the respondent no.2 Committee has (2) invalidated the claim of the petitioner as belonging to "Mahadeo Koli", Scheduled Tribe. 2. Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that from the perusal of the birth and death register maintained by Grampanchayat, it can be seen that the caste of the petitioner has been shown as "Hindu Mahadeo Koli" in the year 1972. 3. The respondent no.2 Committee, on perusal of the material placed before it, has found that there are certain documents pertaining to the petitioner himself, which show his caste / tribe to be "Koli". The petitioner has not been in a position to produce any document even before this court, which is pre-constitutional document, to establish his claim that he belongs to "Mahadeo Koli", Scheduled Tribe. The earliest document on which the petitioner relies is of the year 1972. 4. The interference into findings of fact arrived at, by the Committee, would be permissible, only if it is found that the findings are recorded in a perverse manner. No perversity could be found with the approach adopted by the Committee so as to warrant interference. 5. Petition is, therefore, dismissed. ( R.K. DESHPANDE ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp1052