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 1, Cited by 6]

Bombay High Court

Rahul Vishnupant Bende vs The Scheduled Tribes Caste ... on 5 August, 2016

Author: B. P. Dharmadhikari

Bench: B. P. Dharmadhikari

                                                                 1                                       jg.wp2462.05.odt




                                                                                                                   
                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.




                                                                                     
                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 2462 OF 2005

    Rahul son of Vishnupant Bende,
    aged about 30 years, Occupation Service, 




                                                                                    
    resident of Saramaspura, Achalpur, 
    Tahsil Achalpur, District Amravati.                                                                      ... Petitioner
     
                      //   VERSUS  // 




                                                                 
    (1) The Scheduled Tribes Caste
          Certificates Scrutiny Committee, 
                                         
          Irvin Chowk, Amravati through 
          its Deputy Director/Secretary. 
                                        
    (2) High School Education Society, 
          through its Secretary, Achalpur 
          City, District Amravati. 

    (3) The Head Master,
       

          City High School, Achalpur, 
          District Amravati. 
    



    (4) The Education Officer (Secondary),
          Zilla Parishad, Amravati. 

    (5) The State of Maharashtra,





          through its Secretary, 
          Department of Tribal Development
          and Research, Mantralaya, 
          Mumbai - 400 032.                                                                              ... Respondents 
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





    Shri Ashwin Deshpande, Advocate for the petitioner 
    Shri N. R. Patil, AGP for the respondent nos. 1, 4 and 5
    None for respondent nos. 2 and 3
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                  CORAM :  B. P. DHARMADHIKARI &
                                                                            KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
                                                                 DATE    :   5-8-2016.




          ::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2016                                               ::: Downloaded on - 10/08/2016 00:16:07 :::
                                                  2                              jg.wp2462.05.odt




                                                                                        
    ORAL ORDER   (Per : B. P. Dharmadhikari, J.)

Heard Shri Deshpande, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Patil, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos. 1, 4 and 5.

2. Nobody appears for the respondent nos. 2 and 3.

3. Short submission of Advocate Deshpande is only because of apprehension that old documents mentioning tribe as 'Halbi' could have been referring to tribe 'Koshti Halbi', the caste claim has been invalidated.

Old documents placed on record are not found to be interpolated or tampered and though affinity test has been applied, there is no finding that the said test proved that the petitioner belongs to 'Halbi Koshti' tribe.

Learned Advocate submits that the approach adopted by committee is, therefore, erroneous and unsustainable. He has taken us through relevant observations in the impugned order of the Scrutiny Committee dated 12-4-2005. By placing reliance upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Priya s/o Pravind Parate Vs. Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificates Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur and others reported at 2013(1) Mh.L.J. 180, learned Advocate seeks a direction to issue validity in favour of the petitioner.

::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 10/08/2016 00:16:07 :::

3 jg.wp2462.05.odt

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader on the other hand is strongly opposing the petition. He contended that existence of 'Halbi', Scheduled Tribe and another tribe with same name i.e. 'Halbi Koshti' or 'Koshti Halbi' is not in dispute, as such, the Scrutiny Committee did not solely rely upon documents and applied affinity test. The evidence brought on record by the petitioner did not show that he belongs to Halbi, Scheduled Tribe, as such, the findings of the Scrutiny Committee or invalidation of caste claim by it cannot be interfered in writ jurisdiction.

He argued that judgment of this Court in Priya s/o Pravind Parate Vs. Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificates Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur and others (supra) does not look into the facts like this.

5. With the assistance of respective counsel, we have perused the impugned order as also the reported judgment. In reported judgment, the Division Bench has found that while considering the affinity test, it is to be born in mind that present traits of a claimant may not match claimant's tribe. A greater reliance, therefore, needs to be placed on documentary evidence and while dealing with documents, pre-Independence documents carry higher degree of probative value. The Division Bench was dealing with Halbi, Scheduled Tribe claim only.

::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 10/08/2016 00:16:07 :::

4 jg.wp2462.05.odt

6. In present matter, documents mentioned in paragraph no. 3 of the order by Scrutiny Committee at serial nos. 8 to 17 are all for period prior to 1950. The oldest document appears to be of 17-4-1922. The petitioner has also supplied three documents which are prior to 1960. All these documents have been duly verified by vigilance cell authorities and they have not found any tampering or interpolation in said documents.

7. Caste claim has been invalidated only because of a possibility that these documents may be recording sub caste 'Halbi' of caste 'Koshti'.

This is apparent from discussion of Committee in paragraph 13A and 13D.

Committee is bound to take adequate precaution. However, merely because it entertains a doubt, without proper material or finding, it cannot invalidate caste claim. In present matter, though vigilance enquiry had been carried out, it could not come across any document where caste is recorded as 'Halbi Koshti' or 'Koshti'. Similarly, though it has appreciated the answers and material disclosed by the petitioner for finding out affinity, it has concluded that affinity with Scheduled Tribe, 'Halbi' is not established. It has not found that traits or customs spoken of by the petitioner were of 'Halbi Koshti' castes.

8. In this situation, following the Division Bench judgment ::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 10/08/2016 00:16:07 ::: 5 jg.wp2462.05.odt mentioned supra, we find the approach and application of mind of Scrutiny Committee is unsustainable. Accordingly, the order dated 12-4-2005 is quashed and set aside. The respondent no. 1 - The Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificates Scrutiny Committee, Amravati is directed to issue validity to the petitioner as belonging to 'Halbi', Scheduled Tribe.

Rule is made absolute. No costs.




                      JUDGE
                                  ig                                   JUDGE
                                
    wasnik
      
   



                                        CERTIFICATE





"I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct copy of original singed Judgment."

Uploaded by : A. Y. Wasnik, P.A. Uploaded on : 9-8-2016 ::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 10/08/2016 00:16:07 :::