1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4690 OF 2009 Anil S/o.Bhagwan Savle (Koli) PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and another RESPONDENTS Mr.A.G.Talhar, learned counsel for petitioner. Mr.N.N.Jadhav, learned AGP for respondent no.1. Mr.V.S.Malte, learned counsel for respondent no.2. (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 21/07/2009 PER COURT : 1. This petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India takes exception to an order passed by the Scrutiny Committee dated 09/02/2009 invalidating the Tribe Claim of the petitioner is belonging to “Koli Mahadev” Schedule Tribe. 2. The caste certificate issued to the petitioner came to be referred to the respondents Scrutiny Committee by the Assistant Collector, Pachora, Division Pachora, by communication dated 07/10/1996. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner supplied various documents. A 2 vigilance inquiry was ordered by the Scrutiny Committee and during the vigilance inquiry, the Vigilance Committee obtained the school leaving certificates of the petitioner’s elder brothers i.e. Kailas Bhagwan Savle and Ramesh Bhagwan Savle in which their caste was recorded as “Hindu Koli” and Hindu O.B.C. category respectively. It appears that the elder brother of petitioner by name Kailas Bhagwan Salve was admitted in the school on 20.06.1968 and his other brother Ramesh Bhagwan Savle was admitted in school on 26/06/1972. The respondent Scrutiny Committee in the light of the aforesaid contra evidence came to the conclusion that the petitioner had miserably failed to establish that he belongs to “Koli Mahadeo” Schedule Tribe. 3. Shri.A.G.Talhar, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged before us that the respondent’s Scrutiny Committee has not appreciated the school leaving certificate of the petitioner and has also not taken into consideration the recording of the caste of other relatives of the petitioner and has thus not appreciated the affidavits of the near relatives of the petitioner. It is urged before us by Shri.Talhar, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has adduced sufficient evidence that the petitioner belongs to “Koli Mahadeo” Schedule Tribe. Shri.Malte, learned counsel for the respondent’s Scrutiny Committee has urged for dismissal of the petition on the ground of overwhelming contra evidence. 4. Mere granting of validity certificate to other relatives can not be said to be discharging the burden which is placed on the candidate 3 whose caste is under scrutiny before the Scrutiny Committee, particularly when there is contra evidence. In the present case, the caste of the elder brothers of the petitioner has been recorded as “Hindu Koli” and other backward class. Thus in the record pertaining to the brothers of the petitioners, their caste has not been recorded as “Mahadeo Koli”. In the light of such overwhelming contra evidence, according to us, the school leaving certificate of the petitioner or the certificates granted to the other relatives can not have any presumptive value. We therefore find that the Scrutiny Committee has not committed any error in invalidating the Tribe claim of the petitioner. In the light of that, therefore there is no merit in the petition, and the petition is therefore summarily dismissed with no order as to costs. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/JULY 2009/wp4690-09