pvr wp7707-10 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7707 OF 2010 Mr.Avinash Maruti Bhosale. ...Petitioner vs. 1.The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee,Pune & Anr. ...Respondents --- Mr.Uday Warunjikar, for Petitioner. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, AGP for Respondents. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & N.D.DESHPANDE,JJ. DATED: 14th January, 2011 P.C.: 1. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Scrutiny committee dated 6.8.2010 holding that the petitioner s claim that he belongs to Thakar, Scheduled Tribe is not valid. The learned Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that the Scrutiny Committee has not considered in its pvr wp7707-10 - 2 - order the affidavit of the petitioner and the documents produced with that affidavit, on the contrary, the Scrutiny committee has considered the record which was produced by the Vigilance Cell alongwith its report. The learned Counsel submits that the petitioner had filed affidavit stating therein that the persons in relation to whom information was given in the report of the Vigilance Cell are not related to the petitioner. The learned Counsel submits that the order of the Scrutiny Committee suffers from non application of mind to the relevant material which was produced by the petitioner, and the Scrutiny Committee has taken into consideration irrelevant material. 2. It is settled law that the burden of proof is entirely on the person who is claiming to belong to a tribe which is included in the Schedule. The petitioner, therefore, should have produced entires either in the school record or pvr wp7707-10 - 3 - in the birth record or the death record of his father, grandfather and great grandfather. The petitioner has not produced any record showing the caste of his father or grandfather. The Vigilance Cell in its report has stated that one Mr.Dattatray Rajaram Bhosale was related to the petitioner and was his uncle. The school record and the death & birth register record that was relied on in the inquiry in relation to the caste claim of said Dattatray Rajaram Bhosale has been produced by the Vigilance Cell alongwith its report and alongwith that the Vigilance Cell has produced the entires about various persons. Even assuming that the persons in relation to whom the information is given by the Vigilance Cell were not related to the petitioner, in our opinion, as the entire burden to prove his claim was on the petitioner and the best evidence to prove that the petitioner belongs to Thakar Scheduled Tribe would have been the entires about caste in pvr wp7707-10 - 4 - relation to the father and grandfather of the petitioner and as the petitioner has not produced that evidence as also not given any reason why he has not been able to produce that evidence, an adverse inference can be drawn against the petitioner that had it produced those records it would have gone against him. In our opinion, excluding from consideration the entire material produced by the Vigilance Cell and considering only the evidence produced by the petitioner, a conclusion cannot be reached that the petitioner has proved that he belongs to Thakar, Scheduled Tribe. Perusal of the order of the Scrutiny committee shows that the Scrutiny Committee has also conducted affinity test and has held that the petitioner does not have any affinity with Thakar Scheduled Tribe. The Scrutiny committee is a body constituted by the State Government pursuant to the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. pvr wp7707-10 - 5 - Addl.Commissioner, Tribal Dept., 1994(6) SCC 241 . It is a body consisting of experts who have knowledge of the subject and therefore, after conducting the affinity test if the finding is recorded by that Committee, unless there is compelling reason, the Court is not justified in interfering with that order. Taking overall view of the matter, therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order. The petition is, therefore, rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J.) pvr wp7707-10 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3151 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7707 OF 2010 Mr.Avinash Maruti Bhosale. ...Petitioner vs. 1.The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee,Pune & Anr. ...Respondents --- Mr.Uday Warunjikar, for Petitioner. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, AGP for Respondents. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & N.D.DESHPANDE,JJ. DATED: 14th January, 2011 P.C.: Heard. The application granted in terms of prayer clause (a). (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J.)