WP No. 8423/09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8423 OF 2009 Shaikh Najmunisabegum w/o. Nazir Ahmed, R/o. At Post Kundalwadi, Tq. Biloli, Dist. Nanded. ....Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee No. 2, Aurangabad Division, Latur. 3. The State Education Commission, Mumbai. 4. The Collector, Nanded. 5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 6. The Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Kundalwadi, Tq. Biloli, Dist. Nanded. ....Respondents. Mr. A.S. Bayas, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 5. Mr. S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for intervener. WP No. 8423/09 2 CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & T. V. NALAWADE, JJ. Reserved on : 14th September, 2011. Pronounced on : 20th September, 2011. ORDER : [ PER T. V. NALAWADE, J. ] 1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to challenge the decision dated 4.11.2009 given by Caste Scrutiny Committee, Latur. The claim of the petitioner that she belongs to Other Backward Class (OBC) "Momin" of Muslim community is rejected by the Committee. 2. Both the sides are heard. The original record was called. The intervener from Civil Application No. 18662/2010 was allowed to argue. 3. In the year 2007 the petitioner was elected as Member of Municipal Council of Kundalwadi, Tq. Biloli, Dist. Nanded on a seat reserved for OBC female category. For proving the claim before the Committee, the petitioner relied on documents like a copy of sale deed allegedly executed in favour of her father in the year 1941, certificate issued by Muslim OBC Organization in favour of petitioner, genealogy prepared by son of the petitioner in respect of family tree of her father, school certificate issued to son of the petitioner, validity certificate in respect of caste issued to two WP No. 8423/09 3 persons and some affidavits. Copy of Nikahnama in respect of marriage of the petitioner was also produced. 4. The Committee has considered aforesaid record and also the report of Vigilance Cell. The Vigilance Cell has collected some record which includes the school record in respect of other sons of petitioner. The record shows that the Committee adjourned the matter time and again to give opportunity to the petitioner to produce the relatives for proving the relationship with Other Backward Class persons. Such opportunity was given in respect of the persons whose caste validity certificates, copies were produced before the Committee and also in respect of other relatives. The Vigilance Committee's report shows that it has recorded statements of persons in respect of whom the caste validity certificates were produced and they denied that they have sworn affidavits in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner is their relative. The Vigilance Cell visited the school from where the school leaving certificate in respect of son was collected and it found that the word "Momin" was added subsequently. The original record was seen. One certificate in respect of so called cousin brother was produced, but relationship with that person could not be established by the petitioner. On the other hand, the school record in respect of four other sons of petitioner shows that WP No. 8423/09 4 the religion is recorded as "Muslim", but no caste like "Momin" is recorded in their school record. Original document of sale was not produced by the petitioner and only a zerox copy was produced. No evidence in respect of that document was also given by the petitioner before the Committee. 5. The record shows that as per the case of petitioner her grandfather was resident of village Arli and he had shifted from Arli to Biloli. The Vigilance Committee visited village Arli. There was no person of "Momin" caste in Arli and nobody came forward to support this claim. The Committee also visited the locality where the relatives of father's side of the petitioner are living in Biloli (Naikadi Galli) and the Vigilance Committee found that those relatives were not saying that they belong to "Momin" caste. The petitioner avoided to bring the relatives of father's side before the Committee and no account of such relatives was given to the Committee. The record shows that her father has left behind four sons and five daughters. Four sons were admitted in Urdu school and the sons and daughters of these four brothers of petitioner were admitted in Marathi school. The petitioner could have produced that record, but she avoided to do so. The record shows that youngest brother of petitioner is employed in Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, but no record in respect of that WP No. 8423/09 5 brother is also produced. Thus, the petitioner failed in affinity test. 6. The petitioner did not file reply in respect of the Vigilance Cell report which is against her. She avoided to turn up after production of the Vigilance Cell report. In view of aforesaid circumstances, the Committee decided the claim of petitioner on the basis of material available to it. The Committee has rightly not given weight to so called Nikahnama as no register was maintained in respect of this document. No weight could be given to zerox copy of so called sale deed in view of aforesaid circumstances. No fault can be found in the decision taken by the Committee and so no interference is possible in the decision. The petition stands rejected. [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] [ NARESH H. PATIL, J.] ssc/