Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The petitioner, was elected as a Sarpanch of Talegaon Dighe Grampanchayat, Tq. Sangamner. Her OBC certificate was forwarded to the scrutiny committee for validation. A vigilance enquiry was conducted. Her reply to the report was solicited. Respondent nos 5 and 6 intervened and tried to object her claim. After hearing, by the impugned order the committee refused to validate the OBC certificate.

4. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that a pre- constitutional birth record of petitioner's great great grandfather of 24.02.1902 and one of 05.07.1904, which were in Modi script, which were got translated by the petitioner through one Mr. Milind Suresh Joshi, were discarded by the committee without assigning cogent and convincing reasons. It merely accepted the opinion of the vigilance officer without calling for the original record from the concerned Tahsil office. He would further point out that in fact even the vigilance officer had entertained doubt only in respect of one of these two entries, of the year 1904. No such doubt was expressed in respect of the other entry of 1902, wherein petitioner's great great grandfather was described in the caste column of the birth 11681 23.odt record as 'Kunbi'. Without applying mind and without reading the vigilance report correctly, the committee has perfunctorily rejected such pre- constitutional record having greatest probative value. The approach and appreciation of the evidence by the committee is perverse, arbitrary and capricious.

11681 23.odt

7. The learned A.G.P. Ms. Joshi would vehemently submit that the Modi script record of the pre-constitutional period in respect of petitioner's great great grandfather could not be verified as reported by the vigilance officer in his report, since the record was not available. Consequently, in the absence of verification of genuineness of such old record, no fault can be found with the committee in refusing to rely upon those entries.