Ku. Smita Krushnarao Nandanwar (After Marriage) Sau. Smita Gajanan Mate vs The Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee & Anr.

(PER : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.)

Heard.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties.

By this Petition, the Petitioner challenges the order dated 04.02.2022 passed by the Respondent No. 1/Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee, Amravati, whereby the caste claim of the Petitioner towards ‘Halbi’ Scheduled Tribe is invalidated.

As per contention of the Petitioner, he is belonging to ‘Halbi’ caste which is recognised as Scheduled Tribe category. The Petitioner after passing HSC examination had acquired the qualification of D. Ed. and thereafter being fully qualified for the post of Assistant Teacher, came to be appointed as Assistant Teacher by appointment order dated 27.12.1999 in the school run by the Respondent No. 2/Zilla Parishad. The appointment of the Petitioner as Assistant Teacher in the Respondent No. 2 Department is under Scheduled Tribe category. The Petitioner is further pursuing her study and, therefore, her caste claim was forwarded for validation on 06.12.1994 to the Respondent No.1/Committee. The Petitioner alongwith her caste claim forwarded various documents in all 19 in number to substantiate the caste claim. The Petitioner relied upon pre-Constitution entries of the year 1946 which is the Birth Extract of the Petitioner’s grandfather dated 05.08.1946, copy of Service Book Extract of Petitioner’s father dated 05.08.1946, copy of School Leaving Certificate of Petitioner’s grandfather dated 25.04.1927 and copy of Birth and Death Extract of the Petitioner’s cousin grandfather dated 19.11.1914. The caste claim of the present Petitioner was further referred for the vigilance. After the receipt of Vigilance Report, show cause notice was issued to the present Petitioner to explain the adverse entries. The explanation was given by the Petitioner stating that the Vigilance Committee has relied upon adverse document dated 10.10.1911 of cousin grandfather but the Petitioner has disowned the relationship of said person. Despite the explanation given by the Petitioner which was not considered by the Committee and the caste claim of the Petitioner was invalidated.

Heard Mr. Lakhey, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, who invited our attention towards the impugned order and submitted that, the documents on which the Petitioner relied upon are reproduced in the said order which shows that, the Petitioner has placed reliance on the above said pre-Independence documents. However, the Committee has relied upon the document i.e. the adverse entry of 1911 with whom the Petitioner has no relationship and the Committee has not explained, on the basis of which evidence, the relationship of said adverse entry of cousin grandfather of the Petitioner relates with the present Petitioner. Therefore, he submitted that, without having any evidence regarding the connection with the adverse entry, the Committee has ignored various documents on which the Petitioner relied upon and invalidated the caste claim and, therefore, the order impugned deserves to be quashed and said aside.

He also invited our attention towards various judgments i.e. Writ Petition No. 5128/2006 which was filed by his brother and by the judgment of this Court he was granted with a validity. Similarly, the real sister of the present Petitioner in view of the judgment in Writ Petition No. 2027/2000 granted with a validity. Thus, he submitted that her real brother and sister are already granted with a validity and, therefore, in view of the judgment of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale Vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1 & Ors., 2010(6) Mh.L.J. 401, the Petitioner is entitled for the validity certificate and, therefore, the order passed by the Committee deserves to be quashed and set aside.

Per contra, learned AGP strongly opposed the said contention and submitted that, there are ‘Koshti’ and ‘Sali’ (lkGh) adverse entries against the forefathers of the present Petitioner and, therefore, the Scrutiny Committee has rightly appreciated the evidence on the basis of the documents which are collected by the vigilance. In view of that, there is no reason to interfere with the said order.

She further invited our attention towards the said adverse documents and the observation of the Committee in regard to the said documents and submitted that the Committee has appreciated the said documents in proper perspective and thereafter invalidated the caste claim of the present Petitioner and, therefore, no interference is called for.

After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the record it reveals that, the Petitioner has claimed the validity on the basis of the validities granted to her real brother and real sister in view of the judgment of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale (supra). He invited our attention towards the decision in Writ Petition No. 5128/2006 by which her real brother was granted with a validity and the said validity certificate is also placed on record. Similarly, her real sister Ranjana was also granted with a validity in view of the judgment in Writ Petition No. 2027/2000.

Before entering into the merits of the case, it would be appropriate to refer the family tree which is reproduced as under.

The caste validity certificate issued to the real brother and real sister of the Petitioner are also placed on record which are at record page 137, 138. The Police Vigilance Cell Report is also placed on record which is at record page 87, wherein the Vigilance Report shows that, the documents on which the Petitioner relied upon are verified and no doubt is raised as far as the documents which are produced by the Petitioner in support of her claim i.e. the birth entry of son of Ganpat Sakharam, the grandfather of the present Petitioner dated 06.08.1946, wherein the grandfather of the Petitioner was recorded as ‘Halbi’. Similarly, father of the present Petitioner was also recorded as ‘Halbi’. Sakharam the great-grandfather of the present Petitioner was also recorded as ‘Halbi’ in 1914 while recording the birth entry of his son. Similarly, said Sakharam again in 13.08.1920 was recorded as ‘Halbi’ while taking a birth entry of another son. The Vigilance Officer has verified these documents and these documents are found to be genuine. During verification, as the Vigilance Report nowhere discloses that any interpolation or any doubt arose in their minds as to the genuineness of the said documents.

Admittedly, on the basis of the similar documents, the real brother and sister of the present Petitioner were granted with a validity by the order of this Court. Therefore, the judgment of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale (supra) will come into play.

As far as the oldest documents are concerned, now it is well settled that, the documents of pre-Independence era will have a great probative value. This Court relying on the said documents has already granted a validity to the real brother and real sister of the present Petitioner.

The documents pertaining to the grandfather, great-grandfather, i.e. the extract of admission register in Nagar Parishad Marathi School, Achalpur, wherein the caste is shown to be ‘Halbi’. The documents regarding the birth certificates of the son of the grandfather as well as the great-grandfather also records them as ‘Halbi’. Another document is the Birth Register Extract in respect of the father of the Petitioner issued by the Chief Officer Municipal Council, Achalpur also records him as a ‘Halbi’. Thus, since the pre-Independence era till post- Independence the forefathers of the present Petitioner are recorded as ‘Halbi’.

We find that, the Committee has grossly committed an error in overlooking the aforementioned vital documents which are undisputedly of the pre-Independence era. Therefore, the law laid down by this Court in the case of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale (supra), squarely applicable in this case, wherein this Court observes that, the Government of Maharashtra by its Resolution dated 22.08.2007 directed that where during the course of enquiry or scrutiny of a caste claim it is seen that the caste claim of a blood relative such as father, son, daughter, brother and sister has been scrutinized and accepted, the caste claim of the applicant should be allowed without insisting on any other proof. If the relationship by blood is established or not doubted, and one such relative has been confirmed as belonging to a particular caste, there is no reason why public time or money should be spent in the committee testing the same evidence and making the same conclusion unless of course the Committee finds on the evidence that the validity of the certificate of such relation has been obtained by fraud.

It is not disputed by the Respondents that the documents submitted by the Petitioner are genuine documents and there is no doubt raised as far as the genuineness of the said documents. In that view of the matter, we find that the present case is squarely covered by the judgment of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale (supra) and, therefore, the Petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following order.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms.

Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.