1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 1094 OF 2010. DipaK Yadavrao Sadalwad, Age 31 years, Occu. Service, At Post Kopra, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded .. PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumai-32. 2) The Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, 3) Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee through its Vice Chairman, Kasmira Sadan, Railway Station road, Aurangabad. .. RESPONDENTS. ... Shri S.M. Kulkarni, Advocate for Petitioner. Shri R.P. Phatke, Additional Government Pleader, for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Shri U.S. Malte, Advocate for respondent No. 3. CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 18th FEBRUARY 2010. 2 PER COURT: (S.S. Shinde,J.) 1. Heard Learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission. This Writ Petition takes exception to the decision dated 24-12-2009 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangbabad Division, Aurangabad, confirming the order dated 06-11-2009 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded. The petitioner has applied for issuance of caste certificate before the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded by filing an application along with all the documents relevant for issuance of caste certificate as ‘Mahadeo Koli’ which are included at entry No. 29. In support of his caste claim the petitioner placed on record the caste certificate issued in favour of his real brother Shri Ashok sadalwad, transfers certificates, service book extract, 3 validity of near relative with affidavit thereof explaining relation with petitioner. The Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat rejected the application of the petitioner by his order dated 06-11-2009 on the ground that, certificate claim of one of the family member of the petitioner has been verified by itself could not be the foundation for validation of the candidates claim and each claimant has to stand on his own legs. Second reason assigned by the Sub Divisional Officer is, the petitioner failed to produce the revenue record mentioning the caste therein. 2. The petitioner preferred appeal against the order dated 24-12-2009 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat before the respondent Committee. The appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected by the respondent Committee. The order passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad read thus :- 4 “ The Appellant Shree Dipak Yadavrao Sadalwad, At Post Kopra, Tq. Kinwat Dist. Nanded requested to the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded to issue him a Tribe Certificate as belonging to “Koli Mahadeo” Scheduled Tribe, but the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat Dist. Nanded refused to issue the same vide their order dated 06-11-2009 and therefore the Appellant filed an appeal before the Committee against the order of Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat Dist. Nanded vide application dated 08-12-2009. The Scrutiny Committee deeply observed the Order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat 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, Kinwat is satisfactory and therefore the committee is agreed with the decision taken by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat in the said case and Hence, the said appeal is rejected by the Committee.” 3. The learned counsel appearing for the 5 petitioner submitted that, in spite of the number of documents placed on record in support of his claim, none of the document has been considered by the Sub Divisional Officer and erroneously claim of the petitioner has been rejected. Therefore, learned counsel would submit that, the matter requires consideration. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the Sub Divisional Officer and respondent Committee have submitted that, the sound reasons are recorded in support of the impugned orders, and therefore, no interference is warranted in Writ jurisdiction. 5. Having considered the rival submissions, in our opinion, neither the approach of the Sub Divisional Officer nor that of the Scrutiny Committee can stand the test of the judicial scrutiny. On perusal of impugned order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat it reveals that, none of the document has been considered by 6 the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat. The application filed by the petitioner for issuance of caste certificate as “Mahadeo Koli” Scheduled Tribe has been rejected by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat by general observations. In fact, the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat should have adverted to each document submitted by the petitioner in support of his tribe claim. The perusal of the documents which were placed on record by the petitioner before the Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat would clearly show that, the petitioner placed on record caste certificate issued in favour of the real brother of the petitioner and affidavit thereof explaining relationship with petitioner. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, is not sustainable. 6. In so far as the Scrutiny Committee is concerned, it has merely agreed with the opinion of the Sub Divisional Officer without recording any finding of its own. The Scrutiny Committee has not even bothered to analyze the documents produced by the petitioner, though it was dealing 7 with the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner. The approach of the Scrutiny Committee to say the least, is perverse. 7. In the circumstances, both the orders passed by the Sub Divisional Officer as well as Scrutiny Committee are set aside and instead, the Sub Divisional Officer is directed to issue provisional tribe certificate belonging to “Mahadeo Koli” S.T. in favour of the present petitioner within one month from today. It is needless to mention that, the said caste certificate will be subject to validation by the respondent No. 3- Committee. Rule is made absolute to the above extent. Writ Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. indicated above. [ S.S. SHINDE, J ] [ A.M. KHANWILKAR, J ] SDM* WP1094.10/18-02-10