Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.19 seconds)
Ganesh S/O Shriram Chavhan vs S. T. Caste Certificate Scrutiny ... on 11 March, 2026 cites

Mah.Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 24 March, 2023

20. It is not possible to exhaustively lay down in which cases the Scrutiny Committee must refer the case to Vigilance Cell. One of the tests is as laid down in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil. It lays down that the documents of the pre-Constitution period showing the caste of the applicant and their ancestors have got the highest probative value. For example, if an applicant is able to produce authentic and genuine documents of the pre-Constitution period showing that he belongs to a tribal community, there is no reason to discard his claim as prior to 1950, there were no reservations provided to the Tribes included in the ST order. In such a case, a reference to Vigilance Cell is not warranted at all."
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 89 - A Oka - Full Document

Anand vs Committee For S.&V. Of Tribe Claims &Ors on 8 November, 2011

Judgment 15 J-WP No.801.2025+1.odt "7. ..........we have perused the documents placed on record as well as record and proceedings of Scrutiny Committee. So far as objection in respect of transfer of land to non-trible person without obtaining prior permission is concerned, is no relevancy to conclude that petitioners are not belong to 'Thakur' Tribe. There are consequences laid down in the act itself and that will follow. However at any rate, this ground cannot be sufficient to hold that Tribe of the petitioners was not 'Thakur'."
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 341 - D K Jain - Full Document
1