1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6718 OF 2009 Nikhilkumar S/o.Vyankat Kailwad, Age-Minor, Occu-Education, R/o.At.Post.Dograj, Tq.Chakur, Dist. Latur, Through Natural Guardian/father Shri.Vyankat S/o.Baburao Kailwad, Age-35 years, Occu-Service, R/o.At Post : Dograj, Tq.Chakur, Dist. Latur PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2. The Scheduled Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director. (R) Aurangabad. 3. The District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur, Dist Latur. RESPONDENTS Mr.P.V.Jadhavar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.V.H.Dighe, learned AGP for respondent no.1 and 3 Mr.P.S.Patil, learned counsel for respondent no.2 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6759 OF 2009 2 Bipinkumar S/o.Vyankat Kailwad, Age-Minor, Occu-Education, R/o.At.Post.Dograj, Tq.Chakur, Dist. Latur, Through Natural Guardian/father Shri.Vyankat S/o.Baburao Kailwad, Age-35 years, Occu-Service, R/o.At Post : Dograj, Tq.Chakur, Dist. Latur PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2. The Scheduled Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director. (R) Aurangabad. 3. The District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur, Dist Latur. RESPONDENTS Mr.P.V.Jadhavar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.S.V.Kurundkar, learned AGP for respondent no.1 and 3 Mr.P.S.Patil, learned counsel for respondent no.2 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6763 OF 2009 Puja D/o. Vyankat Kailwad, Age-Minor, Occu-Education, R/o.At.Post.Dograj, Tq.Chakur, Dist. Latur, Through Natural Guardian/father Shri.Vyankat S/o.Baburao Kailwad, 3 Age-35 years, Occu-Service, R/o.At Post : Dograj, Tq.Chakur, Dist. Latur PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2. The Scheduled Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Deputy Director. (R) Aurangabad. 3. The District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur, Dist Latur. RESPONDENTS Mr.P.V.Jadhavar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.V.H.Dighe, 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 : 09/10/2009 COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per A.V.Potdar, J.) 1. These are the 3 writ petitions filed by two real brothers and their sister based on the same set of facts and involved common question of Law, hence to be disposed of by the common judgment. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of 4 learned counsel for the parties, these petitions are heard finally at the stage of admission. 3. By these 3 writ petitions filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, the petitioners herein have challenged the judgment and order passed by the Divisional Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division Aurangabad in Appeal Nos. 744/2008, 743/2008, and 745/2008 vide judgment and order dated 27/02/2009 by which the Divisional Scrutiny Committee dismissed these 3 appeals filed by the petitioners and confirmed the order passed by The District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur. 4. The facts which gave rise to file these 3 writ petitions can be summarized as under : The father of the petitioners have filed an application on behalf of these 3 petitioners before The District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur vide applications dated 13/10/2008 for issuance of caste certificate to the petitioners as they claimed that they belongs to Mahadeo Koli Scheduled Tribe. Alongwith these applications, the father of the petitioners have submitted as many as 20 documents including the Transfer Certificate issued in his favour by the Marathwada Agricultural University, Parbhani in which his caste is mentioned. In the caste certificate issued to him by the Taluka Executive Magistrate, Udgir, dated 16/06/1990 it is mentioned that the father of the petitioners belongs to Mahadeo Koli Scheduled Tribe. The School Leaving Certificate and affidavit of the father of petitioners is filed. Inspite of production of these 5 documentary evidence, the District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur pleased to reject these 3 applications dated 13/10/2008 filed on behalf of these petitioners, as according to The District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur, the documentary evidence produced on behalf of the petitioners is not sufficient for issuance of caste certificate as prayed for on behalf of these petitioners. Being aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioners have filed 3 separate appeals before the Divisional Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division Aurangabad of which numbers are Appeal No. 744/2008, 743/2008, and 745/2008. These appeals were dismissed vide judgment and order dated 27/02/2009 by The Divisional Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division Aurangabad, which are impugned in these writ petitions. 5. Heard respective counsels for the parties in the light of facts mentioned in above paragraphs supra. 6. During the course of arguments, our attention is drawn by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners on the list of the documents referred in the order passed by The District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur in his order dated 13/10/2008 wherein there is reference about the caste certificate issued in favour of father of the petitioners by The Taluka Executive Magistrate, Udgir, wherein the caste certificate was issued in favour of father of the petitioners that he belongs to Mahadeo Koli, Scheduled Tribe. It is but natural that the children are entitled to the caste of their father. All these petitioners are real brothers and sisters and they have produced the 6 caste certificate issued to their father by the competent authority that their father belongs to Mahadeo Koli, Scheduled Tribe. This documentary evidence is prima facie sufficient for issuance of the caste certificate to the petitioners as they belongs to Mahadeo Koli, Scheduled Tribe. It appears that this documentary evidence produced on behalf of the petitioners was not properly considered and appreciated either by the District Rehabilitation Officer, or the Divisional Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad, Division Aurangabad and erroneously rejected the application filed before The District Re- habilitation Officer, Latur and also the appeals were dismissed by the Divisional Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad, Division Aurangabad. If it is so, the impugned judgment and order passed in these 3 appeals by The Divisional Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad and the order passed dated 13/10/2008 on the 3 applications submitted on behalf of the petitioners by which these applications were rejected are liable to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly we quash and set aside the judgment and order passed by The Divisional Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division Aurangabad, as well as the order passed by The District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur. We hereby direct the District Rehabilitation Officer, Latur to issue caste certificate to the petitioners as they belongs to Mahadeo Koli, Scheduled Tribe forthwith. 7. Needless to say that the caste certificate issued would be subject to verification by the competent Scrutiny Committee. 7 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/wp6718-09