Bombay High Court
Tanushree Ramesh Karod And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 26 September, 2025
Author: R.G. Avachat
Bench: R.G. Avachat
2025:BHC-AUG:26750-DB
933-wp-11835-2025.odt
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 11835 OF 2025
Tanushree Ramesh Karod And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Phatale Sagar S.
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya
...
CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT &
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATED : SEPTEMBER 26, 2025
PER COURT :
. Heard.
2. The petitioners claimed to have belonged to
Mannervarlu, Scheduled Tribe. Their tribe certificates have been
invalidated by the respondent/Scrutiny Committee. The petitioners
are therefore before us.
3. The petitioners mainly rely on the validity certificate
granted by the Scrutiny Committee, in favour of father of petitioner
no.1. They further rely on the pre-constitutional documents in the
nature of revenue record wherein the forefathers of the petitioners
have been described to have belonged to 'Mannervarlu' Scheduled
Tribe. According to learned advocate, this record would prevail over
the subsequent contra entries, if any. He mainly urge for grant of
933-wp-11835-2025.odt
(2)
validity certificates on the ground of father to have been holding the
validity.
4. Learned AGP would on the other hand submit that the
old entry in the revenue record is in Modi script. If we see the said
entry by magnifying glass, the word 'Mannervarlu' appears to have
been introduced later on. So far as regards the document of the year
Fasli is concerned, he would submit that the same does not bear any
official stamp or any mark indicating the same to have been issued by
the revenue record officer. He would further submit that the case of
the petitioner's father has now proposed to be reopened. Let the
petitioners wait, until the claim of the petitioners father is decided
afresh i.e. after the case to have been reopened. He ultimately urge
for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. We have considered the submissions advanced, perused
the order impugned herein. It is true that there are certain contra
entries of recent origin. It has also been observed that in school
record, there are some interpolations. The fact is however that there
is a document of the Fasli year 1358. It is in the nature of revenue
record. The same is in Modi script. The name of petitioner no.1's
great grandfather namely Sayanna Nagau Karod is appearing therein
with further addition 'Mannervarlu'. The officer who issued the same
claimed it to be a genuine document. He did not observe the word
'Mannervarlu' to have been introduced later on. The father of the
933-wp-11835-2025.odt
(3)
petitioner has been granted validity after enquiry into the matter. As
such, the oldest entry indicates the petitioners forefathers to have
belonged to 'Mannervarlu'. For the present, we are inclined to grant
the petitioners validity certificates, which shall be co-terminus with
the validity certificates issued in favour of father of petitioner no.1.
6. In result, the petition succeeds. Hence, the following
order :
ORDER
(i) Impugned order dated 11.09.2025 passed by respondent no.2/Scrutiny Committee is hereby set aside.
(ii) The respondent no.2/Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue the petitioners validity certificates of 'Mannervarlu' Scheduled Tribe.
(iii) The validity certificates to be issued shall be co-terminus with the validity certificates of the petitioners forefathers, on whom the petitioners did rest their claim before this Court.
(iv) The petitioners shall not claim any equity.
(v) Writ Petition stands disposed of. (ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) (R.G. AVACHAT, J.) Mujaheed//