(1) wp7738-7739-7743-09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7738 OF 2009 Ku. Priyanka d/o Nagesh @ Piraji Chappalwar, R/o At post Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded, through natural guardian/father Shri Nagesh @ Piraji s/o Hanumantrao Chappalwar, R/o as above. PETITIONER VERSUS 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 WRIT PETITION NO. 7739 OF 2009 Pramod s/o Nagesh @ Piraji Chappalwar, R/o At post Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded, through natural guardian/father Shri Nagesh @ Piraji s/o Hanumantrao Chappalwar, R/o as above. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary to Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. (2) wp7738-7739-7743-09 2. The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee, Aurangabad, through its Dy. Director (R), Aurangabad. 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, District Nanded. RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION NO. 7743 OF 2009 Ku. Pratiksha d/o Nagesh @ Piraji Chappalwar, R/o At post Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded, through natural guardian/father Shri Nagesh @ Piraji s/o Hanumantrao Chappalwar, R/o as above. PETITIONER VERSUS 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 in all three writ petitions. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Additional Govt. Pleader for the respondents in all three writ petitions. ..... CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 1st AUGUST, 2011 (3) wp7738-7739-7743-09 JUDGEMENT (PER : M.T. JOSHI, J.) : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent. 2. The petitioners in these three writ petitions are siblings. Each of them had filed an application before the respondent No. 3 - the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, District Nanded, for grant of tribe certificate on the ground that they belong to "Mannerwarlu" Scheduled Tribe. Their applications were dismissed by the respondent No. 3 vide separate orders, each passed on 6th March, 2009. The independent appeals filed by each of them before the respondent No. 2 - the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad were also dismissed by separate orders on 29th April, 2009. Therefore, they have preferred the present writ petitions challenging the said orders and sought a direction for grant of the tribe certificate to the respective petitioners. 3. Before the respondent No. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer, the petitioners filed nine documents. The (4) wp7738-7739-7743-09 documents included certificates granted by Talathi, Police Patil, Panchanama prepared by Circle Inspector, the school admission record of themselves and of their father Nagesh alias Piraji Hanmant Chappalwar, the Caste Validity Certificate of their cousin grandfather Balram Mannaji Chappalwar and of paternal uncle, namely, Vijaykumar Marotirao Chappalwar, Home Enquiry Report of Tahsildar annexed with statements of the residents of the village and revenue record. 4. As regards the certificates issued by Talathi, Police Patil and the Panchanama of Circle Inspector, the respondent No. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer refused to accept the same as a proof on the ground that the documents are of recent origin and without any detailed enquiry. As regards the school admission record of the petitioners, it was also remarked that those are of recent origin. As regards the revenue record, it was found that no caste is mentioned in the same. 5. However, as regards the crucial documents (5) wp7738-7739-7743-09 i.e. the school admission record of the father of the petitioners, caste validity certificates of cousin grandfather and of paternal uncle, no appreciation of those documents was made except a quotation from the observations made by this Court in Writ Petition No. 2773/1989 to the effect that merely because of validation of the caste of one of the family members of the candidate would not be sufficient and each of the claimant has to stand on his own legs. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that at the time of issuance of caste certificate, the Competent Authority is required to record its prima facie satisfaction only and the detailed scrutiny of the claim is made at the time of validation of the said caste or tribe certificate by the concerned Scrutiny Committee. 7. In the case of "Shilpa Vishnu Thakur vs. State of Maharashtra and others" 2009 (4) ALL MR 127, the Full Bench of this Court has observed that a condition precedent for grant of caste certificate is the satisfaction of the Competent Authority about the (6) wp7738-7739-7743-09 genuineness of the claim made by the applicant. 8. In the present case, the respondent No. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer did not at all appreciate the school admission record of the father of the petitioners, namely, Mr. Nagesh alias Piraji Hanmant Chappalwar. Further, when two tribe certificates of the near relations i.e. of cousin grandfather and paternal uncle are validated, the certificates to that effect were ignored by the respondent No. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer merely for the reason that, that itself would not be a foundation for the candidate's claim. The respondent No. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer, however, ignored that such a validation had a persuasive value and the reasons will have to be forwarded for ignoring the same. Unfortunately, in each of the cases, the respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny Committee merely endorsed the order of the respondent No. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer in the following words : "The Scrutiny Committee deeply observed the Order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, (7) wp7738-7739-7743-09 Degloor, Dist. Nanded and the documentary evidences submitted by the appellant along with the proposal and the Committee have come to the conclusion that the Order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Degloor is satisfactory and therefore, the Committee is agreed with the decision taken by the Sub- Divisional Officer, Degloor in the said case and hence, the said appeal is rejected by the Committee." 9. In view of all the material above, it is clear that both the authorities have not applied their minds to the documents placed before them and wrongly rejected the claim of the petitioners for grant of tribe certificates. When the old school admission record of the father of the petitioners and two tribe certificate validations of the petitioners' near relatives had strongly fortified the claim of the petitioners for grant of atleast tribe certificate, in our view, not only the impugned orders are liable to be set aside but, instead, again sending the petitioners to these authorities for consideration of their respective claims would be an unnecessary exercise. (8) wp7738-7739-7743-09 10. In the circumstances, all the three writ petitions are allowed. The Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (B). The respondent No. 3 - the Sub Divisional Officer is directed to issue tribe certificate to all the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from today. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] npj/7738-7739-7743-09