- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3537/2009 Jeevan Dagdu Waghmare. ...Petitioner.. Versus The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee, Aurangabad. ...Respondent... ..... Shri S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for petitioner. Shri M.S. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent. ..... CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & R.K. DESHPANDE,JJ. DATE: 06.07.2009 PER COURT: 1] This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order of the respondent – scrutiny committee dated 30.11.2008 invalidating the tribe claim of the petitioner as belonging to Koli Mahadeo – scheduled tribe. It appears that the certificate of the petitioner issued by - 2 - the competent authority as belonging to Koli Mahadeo – scheduled tribe, came to be referred to the respondent – scrutiny committee by the Principal, Adarsh College, Omerga Dist.Osmanabad. In support of his plea of belonging to Koli Mahadeo – scheduled tribe, the petitioner submitted various documents, which are enlisted in the order of the committee from Sr.Nos.1 to 15. It also appears that the documents were referred to the Vigilance Cell and the Vigilance Cell conducted an enquiry and submitted its report to the committee on 1.2.2005. It appeared to the committee that in the primary school record of the petitioner, his caste was recorded as “Koli”. The order of the respondent – scrutiny committee also gives a chart in which the school record of father of the petitioner shows that his caste was recorded as “Hindu Koli”. Similar is the case in case of uncle of the petitioner, cousin of the petitioner, brother of the petitioner and the petitioner himself. Even the caste of the real sister of the petitioner in the school record was recorded as “Hindu Koli”. The petitioner chose not to file any reply to the report of the Vigilance Cell. The petitioner was heard and thereafter the committee invalidated the tribe claim of the petitioner on the ground that the school record of father and uncle of the petitioner showed that “Koli” was recorded as a caste in their school record. The committee also observed that the petitioner had utterly failed to prove his affinity and ethnic linkage towards “Koli Mahadeo” - scheduled tribe. On account of paucity of the material to show that the petitioner belonged to Koli Mahadeo – scheduled tribe, the committee invalidated the tribe claim of the petitioner. 2] Shri S.M. Vibhute, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has urged before us that this Court by its judgment dated 11.9.1995 rendered in Writ Petition No.3109/2003 – Rameshwar Walmikrao Waghmare V/s The State of Maharashtra & others, has held the cousin of the petitioner as belonging to Koli Mahadeo – scheduled tribe. The petitioner has also produced on record the genealogy. It is also the contention of the petitioner that another cousin of the petitioner by name Kum.Ashwini Walmik Waghmare has been granted - 3 - validity certificate by the respondent – scrutiny committee. In support of his plea that the said cousin is a blood relative of the petitioner, the petitioner has produced on record the genealogy. We have perused both the genealogies produced by the petitioner and we find that the genealogies are incomplete. 3] Be that as it may. Merely because a relative or a close relative of the candidate has been given the validity certificate by the respondent – scrutiny committee would not be a ground for granting validity certificate to the petitioner automatically. Each candidate is required to establish and prove that he or she belongs to a particular caste or tribe to which a claim is set up. In the present case, the school record of father of the petitioner, uncle of the petitioner and the petitioner himself clearly discloses that “Hindu Koli” was recorded as a caste in their school record. If that be the case, mere granting of validity certificate to the other relative would not axiomatically mean that the petitioner should also be granted validity certificate. 4] With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, we have perused the findings recorded by the scrutiny committee and on such perusal, we do not notice any perversity in the reasoning of the committee to warrant any interference in the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. In the light of that, the petition is, therefore, summarily dismissed with no order as to costs. (R.K. Deshpande,J.) (P.V. Hardas, J.) ndk/c670934