1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4075 OF 2002 Amitkumar s/o Gopalrao Keletwad, Age 19 years, Occu.Student, R/o C/o Ade’s House, Vidyut Nagar, Nanded ..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. The Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Aurangabad 3. The Director of Medical Education and Research, M.S.Mumbai 4. The University of Health Sciences, Nasik (through its Registrar) 5. The Collector, Collector Office, Solapur ..RESPONDENTS Mr.S.B.Talekar, Advocate for petitioner Mr.S.K.Tambe, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 3 Mr.P.S.Patil, Advocate for respondent No.2 Respondent No.4 served CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ DATE : 28th July 2010 2 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by which the petitioner takes exception to the order passed by the respondent – Scrutiny Committee dated 14.3.2002 invalidating the tribe claim of the petitioner as belonging to Mannerwarlu – Scheduled Tribe. We need not advert to the merits of the matter as it is urged before us by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of this petition, i.e. after the tribe claim of the petitioner was invalidated by the respondent - scrutiny committee, two cousins and one uncle of the petitioner have been issued with the validity certificates. The aforesaid validity certificates have been tendered before us by the petitioner. 2. The learned Counsel for the respondent – scrutiny committee had sought time in order to ascertain the facts and accordingly, has submitted an affidavit on behalf of the respondent – scrutiny committee which is taken on record. It is the contention of Mr.Patil, learned Counsel for the Scrutiny Committee that perusal of the record of the so-called cousins and uncle does not reveal that any blood relation is established between the petitioner and those cousins/uncle. It is, therefore, urged before us by Mr.Patil, learned Counsel for the scrutiny committee that the petitioner has utterly failed to establish that 3 the cousins and the uncle to whom the validity certificates have been issued are related to the petitioner in any manner and, therefore, no weight can be attached to the validity certificates issued to them. 3. According to us, since the petitioner claims that two cousins and an uncle have been issued the validity certificates, it would be appropriate to remit the matter back to the committee for a decision afresh. As to whether the petitioner has been successful in establishing the blood relationship or their validity certificates indicate or does not indicate prima facie that the petitioner is related to them, is a question which can call for consideration of the scrutiny committee alone. The Scrutiny Committee is the authority which is empowered with the jurisdiction of verifying the facts and ascertaining the correct position. This is not possible to be done in the exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Court. Suffice it to say that the petitioner on affidavit states that two cousins and an uncle have been issued with the validity certificates and according to us, there is nothing to even prima facie doubt the correctness of the contention of the petitioner. In such situation, the only course available to us is to remit the matter back to the scrutiny committee for a decision afresh by taking into consideration the three validity certificates issued to the cousins and uncle of the petitioner. It is expected that the petitioner 4 would establish the relationship between the cousins and the uncle and the petitioner in order to derive advantage of the validity certificates issued to them. The respondent-scrutiny committee thereafter would be appreciating the documents and deciding the issue, in accordance with law. 4. We, accordingly, allow this petition, quash and set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the respondent – scrutiny committee for a decision afresh. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to produce the validity certificates of his relatives on record and also file such other documents including affidavits in order to establish the genealogy and the relationship. The scrutiny committee, after providing adequate opportunity to the petitioner to decide the tribe claim of the petitioner afresh, in accordance with law. Rule made absolute on the above terms with no orders as to costs. ( N.D.DESHPANDE ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/4075.02wp)