1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.3869 OF 2008 (Omkar s/o Ashokkumar Narnaware vs. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and another) ___________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATED : JANUARY 21, 2009 Heard Shri Dhok, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Thakre, learned Counsel holding for Shri Sambre, learned Counsel for the respondent no.1. The petition is directed against the order dated 16.1.2008 passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee whereby caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to `Mana' (Scheduled Tribe) came to be invalidated. Shri Dhok, learned Counsel for the petitioner, states that the Caste Scrutiny Committee failed to take into consideration documentary and other evidence placed by the petitioner in support of his caste claim. It is contended that the Caste 2 Scrutiny Committee on the basis of certain caste certificates obtained by the father of the petitioner came to the conclusion that the petitioner failed to establish that he belongs to `Mana' (Scheduled Tribe) though some of the documents of the close relatives of the petitioner supported the caste claim of the petitioner. Shri Thakre, learned Counsel for the respondent no.1, supports the impugned order. We have considered the rival contentions of the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. Perusal of the impugned order shows that father of the petitioner has obtained four caste certificates, i.e. from Tahsildar, Yavatmal, Executive Magistrate, Khandala, Sub-Divisional Officer, Yavatmal and Sub-Divisional Officer, Akola. In the first three certificates, the caste of the father of the petitioner is shown as `Mana' (Scheduled Tribe) and in the fourth certificate, the caste is mentioned as Mana (Special Backward Class). Similarly, the documentary evidence collected by the Vigilance Cell in respect of petitioner's paternal aunt, petitioner's father's cousin and cousins of the petitioner, which is reflected in para (3) of the impugned order, shows that all these 3 close relatives of the petitioner are either belonging to Mani or Kunbi caste. The Caste Scrutiny Committee taking into consideration these discrepancies in the documentary evidence adduced by the petitioner in support of his caste claim came to the conclusion that the petitioner failed to establish that he belongs to `Mana' (Scheduled Tribe) and in our view, rightly so. No case is made out for showing indulgence. The petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE khj