1 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2175 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 2175 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 2175 OF 2008 Kum.Seema S.Bhadekar (Minor) Through her father and natural Gurdian Shri.Satyawan P.Bhadekar .. Petitioner V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.R.K.Mendadkar & Mr.H.K.Mandlik for the Petitioner. Mr.V.P.Malvankar, AGP. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 16TH JUNE, 2008. DATE : 16TH JUNE, 2008. DATE : 16TH JUNE, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- . This petition has been filed challenging the order of the Schedule Tribes Certificate Scrutiny Committee. That order is passed by the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the certificate issued to the Petitioner. This order is passed on 31st August, 2007 by the said Committee. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the order needs to be quashed on two grounds. Firstly, that the real sister of the 2 Petitioner was granted a certificate that she belongs to "Thakar" community which was a Scheduled Tribes and that her certificate was approved by this Scrutiny Committee, earlier. The second ground is that the important material produced on record to substantiate his claim of "Thakar" Community, is not taken into consideration. 3. At the outset, we may point out that while deciding the matter under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court is not sitting in Appeal over the orders and Judgment passed by the Judicial or quasi-judicial bodies. This Court would not be in a position to reappreciate the evidence, appreciated by the Scrutiny Committee for arriving on the findings of the fact. The findings could be reversed if they are based on no evidence or are perverse. 4. We have seen that the Petitioner produced photo copies of the certificate and birth extracts which were considered by the Committee in paragraph 6 of it’s order. Believe these extracts because of the conclusive records of the school which was available with the Committee. This Court perused the record from the period 1915 till 1962 and this record also shows that they were referred as "Maratha". The record 3 pertains to grand father’s cousins, grand father’s sisters, grand fathers another sisters and cousin grand father’s sister. Therefore, on the basis of this record, the Authorities came to the conclusion that the Petitioner belongs to the "Maratha" Community and not from "Thakar" Community. The second contention that the sister of the Petitioner was granted the certificate, which was approved by this Scrutiny Committee, cannot become a precedent for the Petitioner to get certificate. If the certificate has been granted to the Petitioner’s sister that must have been granted in the immediate past and cannot become a reason for granting the certificate to the Petitioner. 5. In this view of the matter, we do not find any merits in this Petition. Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.)