1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6638 OF 2009 Shrikant S/o.Balaji Surewad, Age-19 years, Occu-Education, R/o. At-Post-Barbada, Tq.Naigaon (Kh.) Dist. Nanded. 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, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.V.B.Ghatge, learned AGP for respondent no.1 and 3 Mr.U.S.Malte, learned counsel for respondent no.2 (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 06/10/2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per A.V.Potdar, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the 2 stage of admission. 3. By this writ petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 21/07/2009 passed by the Divisional Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad in Appeal No.266/2009 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner and confirmed the order passed by The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, dated 08/05/2009. 4. At the outset, the facts which gave rise to file the present writ petition can be summarized as – the petitioner has filed an application before the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor on 09/06/2008 for issuance of caste certificate as he claimed that he belongs to Mannerwarlu Scheduled Tribe. Alongwith the said application, the petitioner has produced various documents including the caste certificate issued in favour of father of the petitioner and caste validity certificate issued to his real sister, as well as the caste validity certificate issued to his real brother. The said real brother and sister of the petitioner have also filed their affidavit alongwith the genealogy showing the interse relationship between the caste validity holders and the applicant. It appears that the Sub Divisional Officer was not satisfied with this documentary evidence produced by the petitioner and pleased to reject the application. This order was challenged before the Divisional Scrutiny Committee by way of appeal which appeal was rejected by judgment and order dated 21/07/2009 by the Divisional Scrutiny Committee which order is impugned in the 3 present writ petition. 5. Heard respective counsels in the light of these pleadings. 6. During the course of arguments across the bar, our attention is drawn by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner towards the caste certificate issued to the father of the petitioner as well as the caste validity certificate issued to the real brother and sister of the petitioner, and towards the genealogy produced by the said caste validity holder alongwith their affidavits showing interse relationship between the petitioner and themselves. This documentary proof is prima facie sufficient to hold the caste claim of the petitioner. But it appears that as this documentary evidence was not properly appreciated by the Divisional Scrutiny Committee as well as the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor and wrongly rejected the caste claim of the petitioner, hence the impugned judgment and order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor is liable to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, we quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the Divisional Scrutiny Committee as well as the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor and we hereby direct the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor to issue caste certificate to the petitioner as he belongs to Mannerwarlu Schedule Tribe forthwith. 7. Needless to say that the caste certificate issued would be subject to verification by the competent scrutiny committee. 4 8. Rule is thus made absolute on the terms indicated above with no order as to costs. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/OCT 2009/wp6638-09