AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
None for the petitioner. The petitioner is challenging the order of the Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee, Amravati dated 2/2/2002 thereby invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner.
The claim of the petitioner that she belongs to Chhapparbhand Vimukta Jati is on the basis of an entry of birth and death Kotwal register. By an order dated 30/4/2002 while issuing Rule and granting interim relief in terms of prayer clause (d), the learned Single Judge of this Court directed respondent no.4 - Tahsildar to conduct an enquiry in respect of the said document which is placed at Annexure - 4 at page no.13 of the petition.
Reply filed by the State through the respondent no.4 - Tahsildar, Akola dated 26/7/2002 shows that in compliance of the order of this Court an enquiry was conducted by the Tahsildar. It is stated in the reply that the petitioner has placed on record copy of Kotwal register dated 2/8/1933 issued by the the office of Tahsildar on 17/9/1998. It is stated in the reply that one employee of the Tahsil office Akola, namely, Shri Gopal Shrivas a ClassIV employee has prepared the said copy in his own handwriting and the other employee, namely, Shri R.T. Jaswani the then record keeper, who was the caretaker of the record and copyist, signed the document as true copy. It is further submitted that Shri A.V. Patokar was Naib Tahsildar at the relevant time and his signature appears on the true copy. It is stated that there is a resemblance of the said document with the original handwritten copy of Kotwal register, but in the original record there is no entry as to the social status, namely, Chhapparbhand. Thus, in the sum and substance of the reply, the document placed on record along with the petition styled as copy of KotwalBook registered is not the copy of the original document but by tampering the original document, the copy is obtained and the same is placed on record in support of the claim of the petitioner. It is stated in the reply that the fact of tampering of the document is brought to the notice of the Collector, Akola for his information and for further necessary action.
We find that the petitioner is making her claim on untrue document and there is suspicion over the document as to whether the document is genuine or a tampered one and in such a situation, the party who is approaching this Court by suppressing the facts is certainly not entitled for any relief.
Considering these facts, in our opinion, the petition is devoid of any merit. The writ petition is dismissed. Rule stands discharged. No costs.