Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Manoj Mahadev Bhosale vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 26 July, 2024

Author: Mangesh S. Patil

Bench: Mangesh S. Patil

2024:BHC-AUG:16322-DB




                                              1                             wp 11467.21

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              WRIT PETITION NO. 11467 OF 2021

                        Manoj Mahadev Bhosale                     ..   Petitioner

                              Versus

                        The State of Maharashtra and others       ..   Respondents

                 Shri Vivek U. Jadhav, Advocates for the Petitioner.
                 Shri K. S. Patil, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

                                    CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND
                                            SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
                                     DATE : 26 JULY 2024.

                 FINAL ORDER (Per Shailesh P. Brahme, J.) :-


                 .      Heard both sides finally.


                 2.     The petitioner is challenging judgment and order dated
                 04.09.2021    passed   by   the    respondent/Scrutiny     Committee
                 invalidating the tribe certificate and confiscating it. He claims to
                 be belonging to 'Koli Mahadev' (Scheduled Tribe). He seeks to
                 rely on validity certificates of his uncle Sahdev and cousin
                 Narhari. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
                 school record of Fasali 1341 of Sidramappa supports his claim
                 which has greater probative value.


                 3.     The learned Assistant Government Pleader supports
                 impugned judgment and order. He would submit that there are
                 various contrary entries of the blood relatives of the petitioner.
                             2                             wp 11467.21

The old entry of Sidramappa is fabricated and suspicious. The
Committee has proposed to conduct reverification of the validity
certificate of Sahdev and Narhari. He tenders on record original
papers of Sahdev.


4.    We have considered rival submissions of the parties. The
genealogy produced by the petitioner indicates that validity
holder, Sahdev, is real uncle of the petitioner and another validity
holder Narhari is his first degree cousin. It reveals that Sahdev
was issued with the validity certificate by speaking order
considering vigilance report. We are of the considered view that
after following due procedure of law the validity certificate was
issued to Sahdev. Unless it is recalled, the petitioner cannot be
deprived of same social status. Petitioner's uncle was issued with
validity certificate relying on validity of Sahdev. His validity too
supports the petitioner's claim.


5.    From the original papers learned A. G. P. would pointed
out photocopies of the revenue entries to buttress his submission
that the entries in the Modi script do not show caste as Koli
Mahadev. Record reveals that few entries did not indicate caste
in question, but it would be duty of the Committee to undertake
reverification and to find out any suppression or fraud. When
self same record was already considered and validities were
granted in the family of the petitioner, we are unable to take any
contrary   view.     The    Committee     has   already     proposed
reverification.
                                3                          wp 11467.21

6.      The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is
ready to run the risk as per the judgment in the matter of
Shweta Balaji Isankar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and
others judgment dated 27 July 2018 in W. P. No. 5611 of
2018.     We are of the considered view that the impugned
judgment and order is liable to be quashed and set aside. We,
therefore, pass following order :


                              ORDER

A) The writ petition is partly allowed.

B) The impugned order dated 04.09.2021 passed by the respondent No. 2/Scrutiny Committee is quashed and set aside.

C) The respondent No. 2/Scrutiny Committee shall immediately issue tribe validity certificate to the petitioner as belonging to 'Koli Mahadev' scheduled tribe in the prescribed proforma without adding anything. The validity shall be subject to outcome of the matters which the committee has decided to re- open.

D) The petitioner shall not be entitled to claim equities.

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ] bsb/July 24