bsb IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 9050 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 9050 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 9050 OF 2007 Shivraj Ashokrao Pawar ... Petitioner V/s State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents Mr.R.K.Mendadkar for the petitioner. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for the State. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: J.N.PATEL AND J.N.PATEL AND J.N.PATEL AND SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. DATED: DATED: DATED: 16TH JANUARY, 2008. 16TH JANUARY, 2008. 16TH JANUARY, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. Heard. 2. We have given a patient hearing to Mr.Mendadkar who has taken great pains to take us through various pages of the petition including the impugned order. But we find that no case is made out to interfere in the matter. 3. The petitioner obtained caste certificate from the Sub-Divisional Officer, Valva at Islampur, Dist. Sangli, certifying his caste as Thakar, Scheduled Tribe. For the purpose of education, the petitioner forwarded his caste certificate to the Caste Scrutiny Committee, 2 Pune, alongwith application dated 6.9.2005 for verification and the Scrutiny Committee by the impugned order dated 30.10.2007 held that the caste certificate issued to the petitioner stands invalid as the petitioner was not found belonging to caste Thakar, Scheduled Tribe. 4. We find from the impugned order that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has examined all the documents submitted by the petitioner in support of his caste claim as well as the information furnished relating to traits, characteristics, customs and traditions and after examining the same and taking into consideration the report of the Vigilance Officer and the documents obtained through the vigilance enquiry, found that the petitioner does not belong to caste Thakar, Scheduled Tribe and rejected the claim of the petitioner. 5. We find from the documents relied upon by the petitioner that the petitioner has not been consistent in establishing that he belongs to caste Thakar, Scheduled Tribe and the documents relied upon by him do not further his case and, therefore, if the statement of the petitioner’s father Ashok Shankarrao Pawar is examined, it clearly reveals that the petitioner does not belong to caste Thakar as the father of the 3 petitioner has claimed that their mother tongue is Marathi and that they collect honey and do the work as agriculture labour and there is no dowry system in their community. He has candidly admitted before the Caste Scrutiny Committee that he is unaware of the old system when he was confronted with two customary traditions i.e. Bangadi marriage system and the main festival of their community. 6. Further, the Vigilance Committee has been able to obtain the full record in respect of the petitioner and his paternal blood relatives and found that the school record of the petitioner’s grandfather and his grandfather’s cousin notes their caste as Hindu Maratha. Whereas that of his father and uncle (father’s cousin) it is Hindu Thakar and Hindu (Maratha) Thakar. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the Caste Scrutiny Committee was justified in coming to the conclusion that the petitioner does not belong to caste Thakar, Scheduled tribe and rightly invalidated the caste certificate obtained by the petitioner which calls for no interference. 7. Petition stands dismissed. (J.N. (J.N. (J.N. PATEL, J.) PATEL, J.) PATEL, J.) 4 (SMT.NISHITA (SMT.NISHITA (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.) MHATRE, J.) MHATRE, J.)