1 WP 6827.2010 - ( J ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6827 OF 2010 Dattatraya S/o Rajaram Jayewar Age : 20 Years, Occ. Education, R/o : Kundalwadi, Tq. Biloli, District : Nanded. .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Secretary to Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee, Aurangabad Through its Dy.Director (R), Aurangabad. 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, District : Nanded. .... RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. S.M.Vibhute, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.D.Godbharle, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. R.P.Phatke, Advocate for Respondent No. 2. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 WP 6827.2010 - ( J ) CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 27/01/2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : [ PER – S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, taken up for final hearing. 2. The petitioner had applied for issuance of Caste Certificate as belonging to “ Mannerwarlu, Scheduled Tribe ”. The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor [ For short, ‘ S.D.O. ’ ] rejected the application. The petitioner preferred Appeal. The Scrutiny Committee also dismissed Appeal confirming the judgment of the S.D.O. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. 3. Mr. Vibhute, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the school record of the petitioner shows his case as “ Mannerwarlu ” . Even the validity certificate has been issued in favour of the cousin brother of the petitioner. The petitioner’s parents were uneducated. In light of the same, the Caste Certificate should have been issued in favour of the petitioner. 4. Mr. Phatke, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 – Committee 3 WP 6827.2010 - ( J ) submits that there was no substantial evidence to show that the petitioner belongs to “ Mannerwarlu ” caste. As such, the application of the petitioner was rightly rejected. 5. At the stage of issuance of Caste Certificate, detailed enquiry and investigation is not contemplated. The authority has to be prima facie satisfied. It is when the Caste Certificate was sent for verification, at that time the detailed investigation is required to be done. 6. In the present case, the school record of the petitioner shows his caste as “ Mannerwarlu ”. Even his cousin cousin brother has been issued Caste Certificate as belonging to “ Mannerwarlu ”. This Court vide Order dated 13/08/2010 had directed the respondent to obtain necessary instructions in respect of genuineness of the genealogy produced by the petitioner. The necessary investigation was made by the S.D.O. and the respondent no. 2 and it was found that the genealogy which is produced, is correct. 7. In light of the above, we quash and set aside the impugned order and direct the S.D.O., Degloor to forthwith issue the Caste Certificate to the petitioner as belonging to “ Mannerwarlu ” caste. 4 WP 6827.2010 - ( J ) 8. Rule accordingly made absolute, however with no order as to costs. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.] knp/WP 6827.2010