1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3836 OF 2008 Miss Shradha Chandrashekhar Koli .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Mr. A. V. Anturkar i/b Prathmesh Bharghude, for the petitioner Mr. C. R. Sonawane, AGP for Respondents 1 and 2 CORAM: J. N. PATEL, & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED: 16, April, 2009 P. C. . Heard. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he may he permitted to delete the name of Petitioner No.2. Permission granted. Amendment be carried out forthwith. 3. The petitioner is impugning the decision of respondent no.2- the Scheduled Tribes Certificate Scrutiny committee, Pune Division, Pune- Division Pune( Scrutiny Committee), which invalidated caste certificate of the petitioner by its order dated 8th March, 2008 and ordered its confiscation and cancellation. 4. The caste certificate of the petitioner was referred to the Respondent No.1 by the Principal, Walchand College, Solapur for 2 verification of her tribe claim- Mahadeo Koli (Schedule Tribe ) as the petitioner sought admission in the said college against the seats meant for Scheduled Tribe (ST). Presently, the petitioner is prosecuting her study in first year B.E. Course in the Respondent No.3 College. 5. In support of her caste claim, the petitioner submitted her own caste certificate as well as validity certificate of her sister Snehal Chandrakant Koli and her school record as well as school record of her father, wherein the caste is shown as Mahadeo Koli. The matter was handed over to the Vigilance cell which recorded the statement of the petitioner's father while conducting the home enquiry. It has collected documents from the institutes where the petitioners paternal relatives have taken admission for studies and the birth and death record. The Scrutiny Committee found variance in the entries in the column of caste of the relatives of the petitioner from paternal side as most of the entries were relating to the caste- Hindu Koli/Koli, except father of the applicant and her aunt. When the petitioner was asked to attend the personal hearing, she did not avail of the opportunity. In her place, her father appeared before the committee. He was examined, but he did not cooperate with the Scrutiny Committee. On the other hand, he took stand that his elder daughter has already been given a validity certificate and whatever he has deposed in her case may be accepted. Considering this, the Scrutiny Committee Committee found that the petitioner has failed to prove that she belongs to Mahadeo Koli (ST) and that validity certificate issued in favour of Snehal, 3 Petitioner's real sister, cannot be considered for giving validity certificate to the petitioner as each case has to be examined on its own merit. 6. The Scrutiny Committee has considered the caste entry of the paternal relatives of the petitioner in the school registers and birth & death registers, in which almost all the relatives are shown belonging to caste Koli. Therefore, on both the counts, i.e. documentary evidence as well as affinity test, the Scrutiny Committee found that the petitioner has miserably failed to establish that she belongs to Mahadeo Koli (ST) and the caste certificate issued in her favour was held to be invalid. 7. Learned Counsel Shri Anturkar, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that this impugned decision of the Scrutiny Committee has caused injustice and great prejudice to the petitioner, which will also reflect on the validity certificate issued in favour of her sister. It is submitted that the petitioner heavily relied upon the validity certificate issued by the Scrutiny Committee in favour of her elder sister and, therefore, she was deprived of a fair opportunity to lead proper evidence in support of her claim/contention. It is contended before us that earlier view of this Court was that in case, near relatives or the family members of the candidate is issued validity certificate, then there should not be any impediment in granting validity to the candidate or other family members or blood relatives, and therefore, the matter deserves to be remitted to the Scrutiny Committee so as to give further opportunity to the petitioner. 4 8. In so far as the contentions raised by Mr. Anturkar is concerned, it is partially correct. But the ratio of all these decision is not that if family members from blood relatives of the petitioner has been given validity certificate, the Scrutiny Committee, without examining the caste claim of the candidate should blindly issue validity certificate. On the other hand this is contrary to the decision of Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & another Vs. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Developmetn and others, reported in (1994) 6 Supreme Court Cases, 241. The facts in Madhuri Patil's case were almost identical as her sister Suchita Patil had fraudulently obtained certificate declaring her social status as Mahadeo Koli. In so far as the contention that opportunity of hearing was not given to the petitioner is concerned, we do not find from the material placed on record, that the petitioner or her father were ever denied opportunity to establish her claim. On the other hand, the petitioner's father refused to cooperate with the scrutiny committee and submitted that whatever evidence he had led in his elder daughter's case may be considered in the case of the petitioner also. We are informed that petitioner's father also got employment in Railways against post meant for Scheduled Tribe but his caste certificate was never referred for verification. Presently, he is working as T.C. and only 4 years are left for his retirement. 9. Needless to say that the burden is on the petitioner to prove her caste claim and when the opportunity was given and it 5 is not availed of, no case for remand is made out. In recent decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Raju Ramsingh Vasave Vs.Mahesh Deorao Bhivapurkar and others ( 2009 (9)Mh.L.J 1), it is clearly laid down that - “Para-20- ... We do not mean to suggest that an opinion formed by the committee as regards the caste of near relative of the applicant would be wholly irrelevant, but, at the same time, it must be pointed out that only because, by mistake or otherwise, a member of his family had been declared to be belonging to a member of the Scheduled Tribe, the same by itself would not be conclusive in nature so a to bind another Committee while examining the case of other members of the family at some details. If it is found that in granting a certificate in favour of a member of a family, vital evidence had been ignored, it would be open to the Committee to arrive at a different finding.” 10. Therefore, we do not find that this is a fit case which calls for interference. The Scrutiny Committee has rightly come to the conclusion that the petitioner does not belong to caste Mahadeo Koli (ST) which is borne out from the record and, therefore, we find no merit in the petition. The petition is dismissed. On the request made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, interim relief granted by this Court at the stage of admission is continued for a period of 8 weeks to enable the 6 petitioner to approach the Supreme Court in the matter. (J. N. PATEL, J.) ( MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) jpc/-