1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3469 OF 2009 Manika s/o Dhondiba Mande Age: 22 Yrs. occu. Education r/o Digrass (kh) Tq. Kandhar District Nanded. - PETITIONER VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra Through it's Secretary, Tribal Development Deptt., Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2) The Scheduled Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.PV Jadhavar, Advocate for Petitioner; Mr.VD Rakh,AGP for State. Mr.RP Phatke, Advocate for Resp.No.2. ----- 2 CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & K.U.CHANDIWAL, JJ. DATE : 4th DECEMBER, 2009. JUDGMENT (PER: K.U.CHANDIWAL,J.) 1) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally. 2) The petitioner asserts to be belonging to "Koli Mahadeo", scheduled tribe, for which there is a Certificate issued on 31st May, 2002. The petitioner's tribe claim with all necessary documents were forwarded by his college to the Scrutiny Committee (Respondent No.2) for scrutiny and verification thereof. Vigilance inquiry was caused in the matter and the Vigilance cell has submitted its inquiry report to the Committee on 10th August, 2007, having received its copy, the petitioner filed his detailed explanation to the same. The petitioner canvassed, he has submitted the Validity Certificate of his blood relations, namely, Redewar Laxman Lalba, however, Respondent No.2-Committee has failed to consider the same and erroneously rejected the tribe claim by an 3 hazy order. 3) Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the School Leaving Certificate/Admission certificate of the petitioner's uncle is not properly considered, as no inquiry was made at Naik Vidyamandir, Digras (Kh), Tq. Kandhar. 4) The Counsel for the Scrutiny Committee refuted the contentions, pointing that there is no erroneous appreciation of any of the documents. 5) By an application dated 10th September, 2007, the petitioner informed the Scrutiny Committee that his uncle Sopan Manika Mande has not taken education at Zilla Parishad Primary School, Digrass (Kh), but he was at Naik Vidya Mandir, Digrass (Tanda). It is pertinent that the authorities could not trace such school as reportedly it was closed. There is no 4 documentary evidence, barring xerox copy of a school leaving certificate/admission certificate, of said Sopan Manika Mande produced by the petitioner to accept such situation. The Committee in the scenario was justified in ignoring such contention coined by the petitioner. 6) The Caste Certificate issued to the petitioner is by Special Land Acquisition Officer, Krishna Valley Development Corporation, Nanded, District Nanded, wherein it is recorded that he belongs to "Koli Mahadeo" as on 31.5.2002. In the School record of the petitioner, vide School Admission No.1511, dated 17.6.2000, his caste is recorded as "Koli Mahadeo". In identical manner, caste of the petitioner in the school record for the period from 2000 onwards is recorded as "Koli Mahadeo". 7) Sarpanch of the village Grampanchayat, Digrass (kh), has issued a certificate, 5 certifying that father of the petitioner was of Koli Mahadeo. A caste certificate was issued in the name of Dnyanoba Rama by the Tahsildar, Kandhar, on 31.3.1981, wherein caste "Mahadeo Koli" is recorded. 8) The Committee had called the petitioner for personal hearing on 30th November, 2007 along with elderly person in his family, which he complied. He had filled in the requisite form by following the contents therein. 9) The Scrutiny Committee found that the record, to which reliance is placed by the petitioner to be belonging to "Koli Mahadeo" in almost all the documents, commenced from 1983, the caste of his uncle in the School record is recorded as "Koli", which is an oldest document before the Committee. The petitioner did not offer explanation when the caste of his real uncle is recorded as "Koli". 6 10) The service record of so-called cousin, uncle produced, showing belonging to "Mahadeo Koli", could not be considered as the Committee could not lay its hand as to on what basis in the service record caste was so recorded, as the concerned department has not probably verified the tribe claim of said uncle. 11) The caste certificates of Taman Boinwad Madhav Ganapati and Redewar Laxman Lalba, validated by the Caste Scrutiny Committee (at Serial Nos.16 and 18 of the papers) are rightly negatived by the Committee as they are from maternal side and not in blood relations of the petitioner. 12) The overall survey of the documents indicate that in the school record of the petitioner's real uncle's caste is shown as "Koli". There is nothing to suggest that the petitioner's father or grand-father had any time recorded their caste in any record as "Koli 7 Mahadeo". In the situation, rejection of the caste claim by the Scrutiny Committee (Respondent no.2), cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse. The appreciation of the documents is in proper tune. No interference is required. Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. sd/- sd/- (K.U.CHANDIWAL) (NARESH H. PATIL) JUDGE JUDGE bdv/wp3469.09 fldr.27.11.09 Authentic copy (BD VADNERE,PS)