Judgment S.S. Shinde, J. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage. 2. This writ petition takes exception to the decision of the SC, VJNT, OBC and Special Backward Class Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad dated 19th November, 2008, thereby invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that, he belongs to "Malajangam" scheduled caste, as it is evident from the caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar and Taluka Executive Magistrate, Dharur District Beed dated 19th July, 1994. It is further case of the petitioner that, his caste claim was forwarded for verification to respondent No.2 SC, VJNT, OBC and Special Backward Class Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad (for short, "Committee") some time in October, 2000 by the Principal of Dayanand College, Latur. The matter was pending for considerable time before respondent No. 2 Committee for verification. Therefore, the petitioner was required to seek admission for Engineering Course from open category for want of his caste validity certificate. It is further case of the petitioner that, respondent No.2 Committee refused to verify the claim of the petitioner, therefore, he preferred Writ Petition being Writ Petition No. 6345 of 2005. This Court, by its order dated 13th June, 2006 directed respondent No. 2 Committee to verify the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner appeared before the committee and submitted various documents in support of his caste claim. However, respondent No. 2 Committee, without considering the documents on record and merely observing that, all documents are of recent origin, invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner by its order dated 31st January, 2008. 3. The petitioner challenged the said decision of the respondent No. 2 Committee dated 31st January, 2008 by way of filing Writ Petition being Writ Petition No. 2032 of 2008. This Court, by order dated 15th July, 2008 set aside the decision of the Committee dated 31st January, 2008 and remanded the matter back to the Committee to verify the caste claim of the petitioner afresh. This Court, while allowing the petition, transferred the matter from the Committee No. 2 at Latur to the Committee No. 1 at Aurangabad. This Court, by order dated 15th July, 2008 set aside the decision of the Committee dated 31st January, 2008 and remanded the matter back to the Committee to verify the caste claim of the petitioner afresh. This Court, while allowing the petition, transferred the matter from the Committee No. 2 at Latur to the Committee No. 1 at Aurangabad. It is further case of the petitioner that, he appeared before respondent No. 2 Committee and submitted as many as 24 documents in support of his caste claim. The petitioner also filed his written say-cum-arguments before the Committee. The home inquiry of the petitioner through Vigilance Cell was conducted by respondent No. 2 Committee. The vigilance cell report reveals that, the inquiry conducted by the vigilance officer has found the affinity of the petitioner is of "Malajangam" caste. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently argued that, the documents which were produced before respondent No. 2 Committee coupled with vigilance cell report, would clearly demonstrate that, the petitioner belongs to "Maljangam" caste. It is submitted that, the observation of the Committee regarding entry of the caste in documents at Serial Nos. 4 and 14 are in different ink and change of handwriting, is without any justification and basis. As such, there is no evidence or affidavit of the concerned authority to whom custody of record belongs, so as to infer that, the entry of caste in the said record is made by manipulating or made later on for the purpose of use in verification of the caste claim of the petitioner. It is further submitted that, the caste validity certificate of Sachin Malaya Swami, cousin brother of petitioner from paternal side, would clearly supports the case of the petitioner that, the petitioner also belongs to caste "Malajangam". It is submitted that, the Committee has discarded the entry of caste in service record of father of petitioner Chandrashekhar Swami observing that, the entry in the service record is recorded on the basis of caste certificate. On the contrary, the record shows that, the entry in service record was made at the time of joining in service of father of the petitioner. It is further submitted that, respondent No. 2 Committee has not considered the documents on record, so also, vigilance cell report and discarded them on the ground of documents being recent origin. On the contrary, the record shows that, the entry in service record was made at the time of joining in service of father of the petitioner. It is further submitted that, respondent No. 2 Committee has not considered the documents on record, so also, vigilance cell report and discarded them on the ground of documents being recent origin. It is submitted that, there is no single document which shows contrary entry other than "Malajangam". Two documents i.e. sale deed in the year 1947 and extract of death register of village Padoli, Taluka Kallam of the year 1342 Fasali i.e. 1932 are the documents prior to 1950. So also, vigilance report also disclose that affinity test of "Malajangam" Scheduled Caste has been rightly match with the custom and trait of the petitioner's caste. It is further submitted that, document at Serial No. 14 is in Modi language of the year 1342 Fasali is entry of death of the cousin grand father of the petitioner by name Bhimashankar who was died on 25th September, 1932. The age of Bhimashankar at the time of his death was between 20 to 30 years. The observation of the Committee regarding the said document that, the caste entry is in different ink and different handwriting cannot be accepted for the reason that, the document is in the custody of the Tahsil office and there is no access to manipulate the document even if any person intend to do so. It is further submitted that, the Committee did not appreciate the sale deed at Serial No. 13 which is executed in the year 1947 (1367 Fasali) on Government stamp and same was purchased on 24th February, 1947 by the executant Kadayya Ramling Swami. Though this document is not registered, can be considered for the purpose of verification of the caste claim of the petitioner. It is further submitted that, the Committee has not appreciated documents on record in its proper perceptive and discarded voluminous documents without there being any adverse material on record. Therefore, the Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondents vehemently opposed the prayer in the petition and relying upon the affidavit in reply, prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. Therefore, the Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondents vehemently opposed the prayer in the petition and relying upon the affidavit in reply, prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. It is submitted that, the reasons assigned by respondent No. 2 Committee in support of its decision are based upon the documentary evidenced and therefore, this Court should be loath in interfering in the decision of respondent No. 2 Committee. 6. With the able assistance of learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties, we have perused pleadings in the petition, annexures thereto, reply filed by the respective respondents and original record made available for perusal and we are of the considered opinion that, the decision of respondent No. 2 Committee invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner cannot sustain for more than one reasons which are discussed herein below. 7. The petitioner herein produced as many as 14 documents before respondent No. 2 Committee. The said documents are mentioned herein below for ready reference. Sr.No Details of Evidence. Caste Entry. Relation with Candidate. 1 Caste Certificate of the candidate issued by TahsildarDharur No.5264 dated 02/08/1994. Malajangam Self. 2 Admission extract issued by Head Master CPS Killedharur. Malajangam Self. 3 School leaving Certificate issued by Head Master CPS KilledharurNo. 1154 dated 16/06/2004. Malajangam Self. 4 School admission extract of Chandrashekhar Shankarrao Swaiissued by Head Master Zilla Parishad (Priv), School Janegaon, Tal. Kej, Dist.BeedNo. 117 Admission dated15/06/1966. Malajangam Father. 5 Caste certificate of father of candidate issued by TahsildarBhoom NO.580 dated12/10/1998. Malajangam Father. 6 First page extract of Service book of father of candidate Shri. ChandrashekarShankarrao Swami. Malajangam Father. 7 Caste Validity Certificate of Sachin Malyya Swami issued by Div. Caste Certificate Verification Committee. Malajangam CousinSister. 8 School Leaving Certificate of Ketan Chandrashekhar Swami issued by Head Master JantaVidyalaya Killedharur No.3105 admission date 22/.06/98. Malajangam Brother. 9 Admission extract of Ms.RupaliChandrashekhar Swami issued by Head Master Janata Vidyalaya Killedharur, Admission date 26/06/1995. Malajangam Sister. 10 School Admission SGP of Amar Shankarrao Swami dated 16/06/1992 and T.C. of ShahuMahavidyala Letter dated 02/07/1995. Malajangam Uncle. 11 School leaving Certificate of Vivek Vishwanath Swami issued by Head Master Swami Vivekanand Vidyamandir, Padoli, admission dated 16/06/1992. Malajangam Uncle. 12 Death Certificate of Shankar Nirudya Swami dated 23/02/1986. Malajangam Grand Father. Malajangam Sister. 10 School Admission SGP of Amar Shankarrao Swami dated 16/06/1992 and T.C. of ShahuMahavidyala Letter dated 02/07/1995. Malajangam Uncle. 11 School leaving Certificate of Vivek Vishwanath Swami issued by Head Master Swami Vivekanand Vidyamandir, Padoli, admission dated 16/06/1992. Malajangam Uncle. 12 Death Certificate of Shankar Nirudya Swami dated 23/02/1986. Malajangam Grand Father. 13 Death registration extract of Bhimashankar Nirudayya issued by Tahsildar Kalamb District Osmanabad death date 25/09/1942. Malajanam Cousin Grand father. 8. Upon careful perusal of above mentioned documents, it is abundantly clear that, in all these documents the caste of the petitioner and also his father, grandfather, uncle and other relatives is shown as "Malajangam". The documents at Serial Nos. 1 to 3 are the school record of the petitioner herein, in which caste is recorded as "Malajangam". The documents at Serial Nos. 4 to 6 are in respect of father of the petitioner. In school record and service record of the petitioner's father, caste "Malajangam" is shown in column of caste. The document at Serial No. 7 is Caste Validity Certificate of one Mr. Sachin Malyya Swami issued by Divisional Caste Certificate Verification Committee. The petitioner has proved that, the said Sachin Malyya Swami is his cousin brother. It is relevant to mention that, there is nothing on record to dispute relationship between Mr. Sachin Malyya Swami and the petitioner herein. The document at Serial No. 8 school leaving certificate of one Mr. Ketan Chandrashekhar Swami, who is brother of petitioner. The school leaving certificate shows the caste of the brother of the petitioner as "Malajangam". The document at Serial No. 9 is admission extract of Ms. Rupali Chandrashekhar Swami, who is sister of the petitioner. In her school record also, caste is recorded as "Malajangam". In the school record of uncle of the petitioner namely Amar Shankarrao Swami also, his caste is recorded as "Malajangam". The death certificate of Shankar Nirudya Swami, grandfather of the petitioner shows the caste as "Malajangam". In the document at Serial No. 13 Stamp paper having value of Rs. One of Asifya Government in Urdu Language, the caste of the great grand-father of the petitioner shows as "Malajangam". The document at Serial No. 14 death registration extract of cousin grand father of the petitioner namely Bhimashankar Nirudayya issued by Tahsildar, Kalamb District Osmanabad dated 25th September, 1942 also shows caste "Malajangam". One of Asifya Government in Urdu Language, the caste of the great grand-father of the petitioner shows as "Malajangam". The document at Serial No. 14 death registration extract of cousin grand father of the petitioner namely Bhimashankar Nirudayya issued by Tahsildar, Kalamb District Osmanabad dated 25th September, 1942 also shows caste "Malajangam". Therefore, on careful perusal of the documents which were submitted before respondent No. 2 Committee, it is abundantly clear that, in all the documents, in column caste entry is shown as "Malajangam". There is no any contra evidence brought on record by the respondents even to suggest slightly that, petitioner does not belong to caste "Malajanam". 9. The documents at Serial Nos. 13 and 14 in respect of great grand father and cousin grand father of the petitioner would unequivocally indicate that, in the said documents the caste is mentioned as "Malajangam". These documents assumes importance in the facts of the present case, since there is no any contra evidence brought on record by the respondents to show that, the petitioner does not belong to the caste "Malajangam". 10. The petitioner is right in contending that, the case validity certificate of his cousin brother namely Sachin Malyya Swami is placed on record before Committee and there is no reason why same should not be accepted as authentic proof to accept the claim of the petitioner that he belongs to caste "Malajangam". 11. Apart from discussion herein above, on careful perusal of vigilance cell report, it is abundantly clear that, the said report clearly lends support to the case of the petitioner that, he belongs to "Malajangam" caste. The documentary evidence produced by the petitioner, coupled with vigilance cell report, would unequivocally lead to the only conclusion that, the petitioner belongs to "Malajangam" caste. Respondent No. 2 Committee has not adverted to the vigilance cell report and on erroneous appreciation of documents produced on record, has rejected the claim of the petitioner that, he belongs to "Maljangam" caste. When there is no contra evidence brought on record, there was no reason for the Committee not to accept the claim of the petitioner that, he belongs to "Maljangam" caste. In all 14 documents are produced on record coupled with vigilance cell report, would unequivocally indicate that, the claim of the petitioner that, he belongs to caste "Maljangam", is genuine. When there is no contra evidence brought on record, there was no reason for the Committee not to accept the claim of the petitioner that, he belongs to "Maljangam" caste. In all 14 documents are produced on record coupled with vigilance cell report, would unequivocally indicate that, the claim of the petitioner that, he belongs to caste "Maljangam", is genuine. At this juncture, it would be worthwhile to place reliance upon the exposition of the Supreme Court in the case of GayatrilaxmiBapurao Nagpure vs. State of Maharashtra and others, reported in (1996) 3 SCC 685 in which, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held; "The rejection of the appellant's claim especially when there is no other evidence placed contra to suspect the proof produced by the appellant and without appreciating the vital document placed before the Committee, was not correct. The High Court also erred in dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant by simply accepting the conclusions reached by the Committee without appreciating the probative value of the documents placed before it. In this case, except the documents produced by the appellant, nothing has been produced by the authorities concerned to arrive at different conclusion. By a wrongful denial of the caste certificate to the genuine candidate, he/she will be deprived of the privileges conferred upon him/her by the Constitution. Therefore greater care must be taken before granting or rejecting any claim for caste certificate. Though in cases of this type, the burden heavily lies on the applicant who seeks such a certificate, but that does not mean that the authorities have no role to play in finding out the correctness or otherwise of the claim for issue of a caste certificate. The authorities concerned must also play a role in assisting the Committee to arrive at a correct decision." 12. Upon careful perusal of the documents, genealogy and vigilance cell report, we are of the considered opinion that, the decision of respondent No. 2 Committee, invalidating the claim of the petitioner that, he belongs to "Malajangam" caste is erroneous and contrary to the record and particularly, in absence of any contra material/evidence brought on record by the respondents. Therefore, we set aside the impugned decision of respondent No. 2 Committee dated 19th November, 2008 at Exhibit-V and allowed the writ petition. 13. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. Therefore, we set aside the impugned decision of respondent No. 2 Committee dated 19th November, 2008 at Exhibit-V and allowed the writ petition. 13. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned decision of respondent No. 2 Committee is quashed and set aside. It is hereby declared that, the petitioner belongs to "Malajangam" caste and the Scrutiny Committee is hereby directed to issue caste validation certificate to the petitioner. Rule made absolute, accordingly. No order as to costs.