Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 2941 (BOM)

Ajay Narayan Parate v. State of Maharashtra

2018-12-12

R.K.DESHPANDE, VINAY JOSHI

body2018
JUDGMENT : R.K. Deshpande, J. Rule made returnable forthwith. 1. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 02.04.2018, passed by the Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati Division, Amravati, invalidating the claim of the petitioner for Halba, Halbi - Scheduled Tribe, which is an entry at Sr.No.19 in the Constitution Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950. The rejection is on the ground that in the entry at Sr. No. 1095, dated 01.07.1953 in the name of Narayan Pandurang, the father of the petitioner, in the School Admission Register, there is overwriting and that the Headmistress has made the endorsement while issuing true copy of it on 29.01.2018 that the word "Halba' has been written in different ink and that the petitioner has failed to satisfy the affinity test. 3. On 5.10.2018, we passed an order as under; "Heard. 2. On 28.11.2018, this Court has passed the following order : "Inviting our attention to page nos. 31 to 37, which are the part of the order impugned, it is urged that entry Halba is written in the School Administration Register in different ink and such is the endorsement/ opinion expressed by the Head Master, Zilla Parishad, Marathi School, Kanheri Gawali, Tq. Balapur, District Akola. We, therefore, direct the Committee to produce the document containing such endorsement along with the entire record. Put up on 05.12.2018." 3. In response to the aforesaid order, record of Scrutiny Committee is produced before us, and on page no.45 of the said record is the concerned document containing an endorsement said to be made by the Headmistress of the School stating that in column of caste the word "Halba" seems to have been overwritten in different ink. 4. This is one of the main ground for rejection of the caste claim of the petitioner. The document therefore, assumes significance. 5. Issue notice to the Headmistress, Zilla Parishad, Marathi School, Kanheri Gawali, Tq. Balapur, District Akola, who made such an endorsement on 29.01.2018, to remain present before this Court on 12.12.2018, along with original record pertaining to entry no.1095 - Narayan Pandurang, and to file an affidavit, as to whether the said endorsement was made by her willingly or at the instance of someone. 6. Office to list the matter for further consideration on 12.12.2018. 6. Office to list the matter for further consideration on 12.12.2018. This order be communicated by the respondent Committee through its Police Vigilance Cell to the concerned Headmistress immediately." In response to the aforesaid order, the Headmistress of Zilla Parishad, Marathi School is present before us and has filed an affidavit dated 11.12.2018, stating that she made the endorsement on her own upon perusal of the entry in the School Admission Register. She has also produced before us the original School Admission Register as well as the Attendance Register in the name of Narayan Pandurang. We find that the endorsement made by the Headmistress is in conformity with what is apparent from the registers produced before us. 4. The question is whether the petitioner has established his claim for Halba, Halbi -Scheduled Tribe. Before the Scrutiny Committee, the petitioner produced about 17 documents in support of his claim. All the documents contain entry of Halba or Halbi, except one which was the conditional validity order issued on 31.01.1997, certifying that the petitioner belongs to 'Halba Koshti'. On three occasions in Writ Petition Nos. 2569 of 2004, 5470 of 2008 and 1386 of 2014, this Court remanded the matter back to the Scrutiny Committee on 27.07.2005, 01.10.2009 and 17.03.2015. The conditional validity dated 31.01.1997 certifying that the petitioner belongs to 'Halba Koshti' caste has been set aside and the direction is given to scrutinize the claim of the petitioner afresh in the light of the documents produced. 5. On three occasions vigilance enquiry was conducted through Police Vigilance Cell. The first was on 07.11.2006, second was on 02.06.2008 and the third was on 08.02.2018. In none of the reports of Police Vigilance Cell, the validity of the documents produced on record is disputed, except the entry in the name of Narayan Pandurang. The oldest document produced on record is of 06.07.1931, which is the School Transfer Certificate in the name Mahadeo Shriram, the grand father of the petitioner, showing his caste as 'Halbi'. It is, therefore, possible that to bring the entry in the School Admission Register in relation to Narayan Pandurang, the correction might have been carried out in the year 1953. The Committee has not called the Headmaster along with the relevant record to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to cross examine. 6. It is, therefore, possible that to bring the entry in the School Admission Register in relation to Narayan Pandurang, the correction might have been carried out in the year 1953. The Committee has not called the Headmaster along with the relevant record to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to cross examine. 6. Be that as it may, we find that the oldest entry of 06.07.1931 showing the caste of the blood relative of the petitioner as 'Halbi'. There is not even a single document showing the caste/tribe of the petitioner or his blood relatives other than Halba, Halbi. After appreciating all the entries contained in 17 documents produced on record, we are of the view that the petitioner has established his claim for Halba, Halbi - Scheduled Tribe and was required to be issued validity certificate. 7. In the decision of the Apex Court in Anand Katole v. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribes Claim, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 113 , it has been held that the affinity test can be used as corroborative piece of evidence and it cannot be treated as litmus test. In view of this, we have to give due weightage to the documentary evidence available on record and the oral evidence cannot be permitted to be lead to record the finding that petitioner does not belong to Halba, Halbi, which is a Scheduled Tribe. The oldest document having probative value clearly establish the case of the petitioner. 8. In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the following order is passed. (i) The order dated 02.04.2018 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati, is hereby quashed and set aside. (ii) It is declared that the petitioner has established his claim for 'Halba, Halbi -Scheduled Tribe', which is an entry at Sr. No. 19 in the Constitution Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950. (iii) The respondent Committee is accordingly directed to issue caste validity certificate in the name of the petitioner within the period of one month from today. (iv) Consequently, the service of the petitioner as a candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribe category stands protected. 9. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. No orders as to costs.