1 WP 10057.2010 - ( J ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10057 OF 2010 Vinod S/o Linguram Mupde Age :17 Yrs.,(Minor ) Occ.: student, Through his guardian father Linguram S/o Piraji Mupde Age : 56 Yrs., Occ. Service, R/o : Atala, Tq. Dharmabad, Dist. : Nanded. .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. 2. The Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims Through its Dy.Director (Research), Aurangabad. 3. The Sub Divisional Officer Degloor, Dist. Nanded. .... RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.H.Koralkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.D.Godbharle, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for State. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 WP 10057.2010 - ( J ) CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 14/01/2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : [ PER - S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, taken up for final hearing. 2. Vide the present petition, the petitioner assails order dated 10/8/2010 passed by the Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad, thereby dismissing the Appeal and confirming the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor rejecting the application of the petitioner for issuance of Caste Certificate as belonging to ‘ Mannerwarlu ’, Scheduled Tribe. 3. Mr. M.S.Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner has been issued the Caste Certificate as belonging to ‘ Mannerwarlu ’, Scheduled Tribe on 12/12/1978. The cousin brother has also been issued the Validity Certificate. In light of the above evidence, it was improper on the part of the authority not to issue the Caste Certificate in favour of the petitioner as belonging to ‘ Mannerwarlu ’, Scheduled Tribe. 4. We have gone through the impugned Order. At the stage of issuance of caste certificate, the authority has to be prima facie satisfied. Detail enquiry is not contemplated. The same is at the time of verification of caste certificate. It is a fact that the Caste Certificate issued in favour of the father of 3 WP 10057.2010 - ( J ) the petitioner was submitted before the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, but the same has not been considered. The application is rejected only on the ground that the old revenue record is not submitted. When the father of the petitioner is issued with the caste certificate as belonging to ‘ Mannerwarlu ’, Scheduled Tribe, it would be a paradox that the son is not issued the Caste Certificate as belonging to the said caste. 5. In the result, we allow the present Writ Petition and direct the Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor to forthwith issue the Caste Certificate to the petitioner as belonging to ‘ Mannerwarlu ’, Scheduled Tribe. 6. Rule is made absolute in the above terms, however with no order as to costs. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.] knp/WP 10057.2010