1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5077 OF 2008 Neelabai Lakanna Kamale @ Neelabai Sidram Koli .. Petitioner Versus Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Pune Division, Pune and another .. Respondents Shri S.G. Kudle, for the petitioner, . Shri C. R. Sonawane, AGP for the Respondents CORAM: J. N. PATEL, & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED: 2nd May, 2009 J U D G E M E N T (Per Mridula Bhatkar, J.) 1. The petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order dated 30.4.2008 passed by the Respondent No1 - the Scheduled Tribes Certificate Scrutiny committee, Pune Division, ( Scrutiny Committee), invalidating the caste certificate of the petitioner. 2. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has submitted that the petitioner belongs to Mahadeo Koli which is a Scheduled Tribe. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pandharpur had issued caste certificate of Mahadeo Koli in favour of the Petitioner on 15.9.2006. The caste certificate of the petitioner was forwarded to the Respondent no.1 Committee for verification, which came to be 2 invalidated. It is submitted that the petitioner produced various documents in support of his claim as Mahadeo Koli (ST). However, the Committee, at the time of verification violated the principles of natural justice and has ignored the validity certificate of Kaveri Dhondappa Kamale, near relative of the petitioner, and also ignored the school leaving certificate of uncle of the petitioner, Jagdeo Mahadappa Koli, which is of 1941 and his caste is shown as Hindu Mahadeo Koli. 3. The Respondents have filed affidavit in reply denying the submissions and contentions of the petitioner. It was contended that the claim of the petitioner was rightly invalidated by the committee holding that the petitioner does not fall in Scheduled tribe, hence this petition be dismissed. 4. The original record from the Scrutiny committee was placed before us. The record discloses that the committee has considered the school leaving certificate of Jagdeo Mahadappa Koli who is uncle of the applicant. The record shows that his caste is shown as Koli in original register and the Scrutiny Committee observed that Vigilance officer has pointed out in the report that in respect of entry of Jagdeo Mahadeop Koli, in the Caste column, the portion was torn by blade and altered and above the word 'koli' the word 'Mahadeo' added in different ink and different handwriting. The committee has also considered the statement given by Dhondappa Lakanna Kamale, father of the Kaveri and has observed that he was not aware of any custom or traites in the community of Mahadeo Koli. It is to be noted that the petitioner though was given opportunity of 3 personal hearing before the committee, to prove her claim, she chose not to appear. So far as, validity certificate of Kaveri, relative of the petitioner, it is to be noted that each and every case has to be decided on its own merit, if fresh evidence is produced and mere validation of caste certificate of one relative ipso facto would not be a conclusive evidence. Reliance was placed on Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. Vs. Additional Commissioner Tribal Development & Ors. (1994) 6 SCC 241. 5. Thus, the scrutiny committee has considered all the documents submitted by the petitioner and after appreciating the evidence on the point of genealogy, ethnological and customary traits, statement of the relatives and report of the Vigilance officer and has rightly given finding that the petitioner does not belong to Mahadeo Koli and has rightly invalidated the caste certificate. We find no fault in the finding of the committee and hence no interference is required. 6. In the result, the petition stands dismissed with no order as to costs. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (J. N. PATEL, J.) jpc/-