Bombay High Court
Shubham Jitendra Thakur U/G Father ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 26 October, 2021
Author: R. N. Laddha
Bench: S. V. Gangapurwala, R. N. Laddha
(1) 1042-wp-11265-2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.11265 OF 2021
SHUBHAM JITENDRA THAKUR U/G FATHER JITENDRA EKNATH
THAKUR ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ..RESPONDENTS
...
Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar, Advocate for the
Petitioner.
Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondents-State.
...
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
R. N. LADDHA, JJ.
DATED : 26th OCTOBER, 2021.
PER COURT:-
1. The tribe claim of the petitioner as belonging to 'Thakur', Scheduled Tribe is invalidated.
2. Mr. Yeramwar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the school record of forefathers of the petitioner 'Thakur' entry exists. Right since 1942 in the school record of the grandfather, cousin grandfather and cousin uncles of the petitioner all entries record caste as 'Thakur'. Only on the ground of area restriction and affinity test, the claim has been invalidated. The learned counsel relies on the following judgment:
1. In a case of Rushikesh Bharat Thakur Vs/ Union of India and Ors. in Writ Petition No.7667 of 2020 dated 16.12.2020.
2. In a case of Harsha D/o Narendra Thakur and ::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2021 04:06:36 ::: (2) 1042-wp-11265-2021 Anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. in Writ Petition No.8484 of 2020 dated 08.01.2021.
3. In a case of Shivam S/o Rajendra Deore Vs. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar in Writ Petition No.14059 of 2019 dated 15.10.2020.
4. In a case of Anand Vs. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and Ors. reported in (2012) 1 SCC 113.
3. The learned A.G.P. submits that, though there are no contra entries on record, the petitioner does not belong to the area where the persons of Thakur, Scheduled Tribe community usually reside. The petitioner also failed the affinity test. The Thakur found in the higher caste. All these aspects have been considered by the Committee.
4. We have gone through the judgments delivered by the Committee.
5. The petitioner relies on the following chart:
v- nLr,sotkpk nlr,sot/kkjdkps uko vtZnkj ;kaps tkrhph uksan uksan.kh fnukad dz- izdkj ukrs 1- 'kkys; iqjkok Jh- egk# gjpan Bkdwj pqyr vktksck Bkdwj 06-06-1942 2- TUe iqjkok Jh- ,dukFk gjpan Bkdwj vktksck fganq Bkdwj 14-06-1943 3- 'kkys; iqjkok Jh- izYgkn xaxk/kj Bkdwj pqyr dkdk fganq Bkdwj 08-07-1948 4- 'kkys; iqjkok Jh- ftrsanz ,dukFk Bkdwj oMhy fganq Bkdwj 07-07-1982 5- 'kkys; iqjkok Jh- olar egk# Bkdwj pqyr dkdk fganq Bkdwj 08-08-1963 6- 'kkys; iqjkok Jh- "kqHke ftrsanz Bkdwj vtZnkj fganq Bkdwj ,l- 15-06-2013 Vh-::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2021 04:06:36 :::
(3) 1042-wp-11265-2021
6. It would appear that, pre-Constitutional and pre-Presidential Notification documents of the petitioner's forefathers record tribe as 'Thakur'.
We do not find a single contra entry on record. The aspect of the removal of area restriction has been considered by this Court in above referred judgments. It has been held by the Apex Court in a case of Anand Vs. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and Ors. (supra) affinity test is not the litmus test.
7. In the present matter right since 1942 all entries of tribe are referred as 'Thakur' in the school record of the petitioner's forefathers.
8. In light of the above, the impugned judgment is quashed and set aside. The committee shall issue validity certificate of 'Thakur', Scheduled Tribe to the petitioner immediately.
9. Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
(R. N. LADDHA) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Devendra/October-2021
::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2021 04:06:36 :::