JUDGMENT V. M. Deshpande, J. - This writ petition questions correctness of order passed by respondent no.1-Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Amravati Division, Amravati dated 28.01.2011 in Case No.DD/TCSC/AMT/BDT/1-04/2005. By the impugned order, respondent no.1 invalidated claim of the petitioner as belonging to Thakur-Scheduled Tribe and the certificate issued to her by Sub Divisional Officer, Akola bearing No. MRC-81/Akola/2529/99-2000 dated 28.12.1999 stood cancelled. 2. Entry no.44 of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, pertains to tribe Thakur. The petitioner claims that she belongs to the said tribe. The Sub Divisional Officer, Akola issued the certificate in favour of the petitioner. 3. Petitioner sought employment with State Government for a post reserved for the Scheduled Tribe. She was found to be eligible for the post of ''Assistant'', in the reserved category of Scheduled Tribe. Since petitioner was claiming employment in reserved category, the Section Officer, Medical Education and Drugs Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, vide order dated 07.07.2005 sent the case of the petitioner for verification with respondent no.1 (hereinafter referred to as ''Scrutiny Committee'') 4. Before the Scrutiny Committee, the petitioner appeared and to substantiate her claim as Scheduled Tribe, she submitted following documents. I. Original caste certificate in respect of applicant issued by Sub Divisional Officer, Akola, Dist-Akola bearing No.MRC81/2529/99-2000 dated 28-12-1999 where in mentioned as Thakur Scheduled Tribe. II. Attested school leaving certificate in respect of applicant issued by Headmistress, Marathi Primary School, Akola vide registration no.14281 dated 11-10-2001 of admission 13-7- 1998 wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur. III. Attested copy of School leaving Certificate of applicants father Shri Devidas Waman Thakur issued by Headmaster, Primary Vidya Mandir, Raver, Dist. Jalgaon vide registration no.49 dated 21-1-2002 date of admission 9-8-1944 wherein caste mentioned as Thakur. IV. Attested copy of School leaving certificate of applicants father Shri Devidas Waman Thakur issued by Headmaster, D.S. Deshmukh, Highschool, Thorgawan, F.K. vide registration no.151 dated 13-7-1954 date of admission 9-3- 1951 wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur. V. Attested copy of Madhya Pradesh Police Service Roll Enlistment first page in respect of applicants father Shri Devidas Waman Thakur, wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur. VI. Attested copy of birth abstract of male bebi of Shri Waman Kalu Thakur Kotwal register of village Shahapur Tq. & Dist. Burhanpur (M.P.) dated 5-7-1936 wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur. VII. V. Attested copy of Madhya Pradesh Police Service Roll Enlistment first page in respect of applicants father Shri Devidas Waman Thakur, wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur. VI. Attested copy of birth abstract of male bebi of Shri Waman Kalu Thakur Kotwal register of village Shahapur Tq. & Dist. Burhanpur (M.P.) dated 5-7-1936 wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur. VII. Attested copy of Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe claim Nasik ratio of hon. High Court Judicature Bombay bench in respect of applicants relative Shri Ravindra Nimba Thakur (order date is not mentioned) wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur. VIII. Attested copy of school leaving certificate applicants grandfather Shri Waman Kalu Thakur issued by Headmistress. Basics School Sunasgaon, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon vide registration no.157 dated 18-1-2002 date of admission 16-8-1916 wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur. IX. Attested copy of first page service book of applicants uncle Shri Chawadas Waman Thakur showing caste Thakur. X. Attested copy of School leaving certificate of applicants uncle Shri Chawdas Waman Thakur issued by Headmaster, Municipal Central School, Jalgaon, vide registration no.366 issued dated 8-1944 date of admission 1-5-1936 wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur. XI. Attested copy of caste certificate in respect of applicants uncle Shri Chawadas Waman Thakur issued by Executive Magistrate, Jamner, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon bearing no. MAG/SR-1077180 issue dated 9-9-1980 wherein caste is mentioned as Thakur Scheduled Tribe.'' The Scrutiny Committee, thereafter, sought Police Vigilance report on 24.10.2005 and accordingly, the Vigilance Cell Inquiry Officer submitted report on 15.12.2005. The Research Officer gave his report that the culture, character, State, tradition, inasmuch as the affinity of the petitioner does not match with Thakur Scheduled Tribe. 5. Though opportunity of personal hearing was afforded by the Scrutiny Committee, she failed to avail the same. Consequently, on the basis of documents available with Scrutiny Committee and in the light of the research officers finding that the petitioner has failed to prove the affinity, the learned Members of the Scrutiny Committee invalidated the claim of the petitioner. 6. With the assistance of both the learned counsel, we have perused the impugned order. The claim of the petitioner was invalidated on following two grounds. (i) That the petitioner failed to satisfy the affinity test. (ii) That the petitioner was not residing in the area meant for Thakur Scheduled Tribe. 7. 6. With the assistance of both the learned counsel, we have perused the impugned order. The claim of the petitioner was invalidated on following two grounds. (i) That the petitioner failed to satisfy the affinity test. (ii) That the petitioner was not residing in the area meant for Thakur Scheduled Tribe. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the law laid down by the Honble Apex Court in the case of Anand Vs. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and Others; reported in 2011 (6) Mh. L. J. 919 and also Division Bench decision of this Court in Prakash s/o Shrawan Deore Vs. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nashik and anr., reported in 2019 (5) Mh. L. J. 228 , to urge that when preConstitutional documents are available with the Scrutiny Committee, the affinity test loses its importance. 8. Another limb of submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has already filed on record, as it could be seen from the document no.8 as mentioned in the impugned order, the Certificate of Validity granted in favour of Ravindra Nimba Thakur, a relative of the petitioner having blood relations and, therefore, in view of the law laid down by this Court in Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale Vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee and Ors. reported in 2010 (6) Mh.L.J. 401 , and submitted that it was incumbent on the part of the Scrutiny Committee to grant validation certificate in favour of petitioner. 9. On the contrary, learned A.G.P. would submit that this case requires remand inasmuch as it is his submission that it was incumbent on the part of the Scrutiny Committee to obtain report from the Scrutiny Committee, Nashik which has validated the claim of Ravindra Thakur. He, therefore, submits that appropriate orders in that behalf be passed. 10. As it could be seen from the impugned order, following documents were considered. (i) Attested copy of school leaving certificate of petitioners father; Devidas Waman Thakur issued by Headmaster, Primary Vidya Mandir, Raver, Dist. Jalgaon, which shows that the date of admission of petitioners father in the school was 09.08.1944, which shows his caste as Thakur. (ii) Another document is of grandfather of the petitioner, Waman Kalu Thakur in the nature of abstract of Kotwali Register of village Shahapur, Tq. Burhanpur dated 05.07.1936 and his caste is mentioned as Thakur. Jalgaon, which shows that the date of admission of petitioners father in the school was 09.08.1944, which shows his caste as Thakur. (ii) Another document is of grandfather of the petitioner, Waman Kalu Thakur in the nature of abstract of Kotwali Register of village Shahapur, Tq. Burhanpur dated 05.07.1936 and his caste is mentioned as Thakur. (iii) Another document is School Leaving Certificate of grandfather of petitioner by name; Waman Kalu Thakur, which was issued by Headmistress of Basic School, Sunsgaon, Tq. Bhusaval, Dist. Jalgaon, which shows that the date of admission of the petitioners grandfather in the said school was 16.08.1916 and the caste was shown as Thakur. Along with the aforesaid documents, which show that caste of grandfather and father of the petitioner was shown as Thakur, prior to independence and in addition to that caste certificates, certificate in favour of Ravindra Thakur issued by Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nashik was also available with the Scrutiny Committee. 11. It is not the finding of the Caste Scrutiny Committee or even it was not found by the Police Vigilance Cell that the aforementioned documents, which were before the Scrutiny Committee, were procured by the petitioner fraudulently. It is not finding in the police report that there was any sort of interpolation in the document. In absence of any finding from the Scrutiny Committee that those documents are procured by fraud or misrepresentation, a specific finding is required to be given by this Court those documents are genuine documents. If pre- Constitutional documents are found to be genuine one, law laid down by the Honble Apex Court in Anands case cited supra, will apply with its full force in the present petition and the affinity test, which is used to corroborate the documentary evidence, as laid down by the Honble Apex Court in Anands case, some failure in that behalf cannot be a factor to disallow the claim of the petitioner. Therefore, finding recorded by Scrutiny Committee that the claim of the petitioner cannot be granted since she has failed to prove her affinity towards Thakur Scheduled Tribe, is contrary to the law laid down by the Honble Apex Court in Anand and Prakas Deores case cited supra. Therefore, the said finding is set aside. 12. Another finding of the Scrutiny Committee is that the petitioner was not residing in the area meant for Thakur- Scheduled Tribe. Therefore, the said finding is set aside. 12. Another finding of the Scrutiny Committee is that the petitioner was not residing in the area meant for Thakur- Scheduled Tribe. The said also cannot be the reason for invalidating claim of the petitioner in view of the law laid down by the Honble Apex Court in Jaywant Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2018 (5) ALL.M.R.975 , in which Honble Apex Court has held that after amendment to the second schedule by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Act, 1976 (Act No.108 of 1976) area restrictions are removed. Therefore, reasoning given by Scrutiny Committee also cannot stand to scrutiny of law and is required to be set aside. 13. The petitioner has filed the family tree. The said family tree was also before the Scrutiny Committee. The learned A.G.P. does not dispute the said family tree. The family tree shows that Gangaram and Shankarrao were the real brothers. Shankarrao was having two son Kalu and Damu. Kalu was having three sons Waman, Laxman and Madhav and two daughters Banabai and Sona. Waman was having two sons Chawdas and Devidas. The petitioner is daughter of Devidas. Ravindra is decedent of Gangaram. From the family tree, it is clear that Waman is grandfather of petitioner whose documents are filed on record. Since there is no dispute about the genealogical tree, there should not be hesitation in anyones mind that Ravindra is related to the petitioner by blood. 14. Ravindra also obtained caste certificate of Thakur- Scheduled Tribe. His case was decided in respect of validation of his certificate by scrutiny committee at Nashik. The said case of Ravindra was decided in his favour vide case No.JAG(ELEC)/20/2002. The validation granted in favour of Ravindra that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe (Thakur) has reached to its finality inasmuch as, as on today, order passed in the matter of Ravindra by Scrutiny Committee, Nashik is not challenged. 15. The submission of learned A.G.P. that the matter needs to be remanded back to the Scrutiny Committee, Amravati because the said Committee has not obtained the say from the Scrutiny Committee of Nashik. This submission, in our view, is devoid of any substance. The Scrutiny Committee, Amravati cannot sit as an appellate authority of Scrutiny Committee, Nashik. 16. 15. The submission of learned A.G.P. that the matter needs to be remanded back to the Scrutiny Committee, Amravati because the said Committee has not obtained the say from the Scrutiny Committee of Nashik. This submission, in our view, is devoid of any substance. The Scrutiny Committee, Amravati cannot sit as an appellate authority of Scrutiny Committee, Nashik. 16. In absence of any challenge to the said order passed by the Scrutiny Committee, Nashik and it is not the finding recorded by the Scrutiny Committee, Amravati that the order of the Committee at Nashik is procured by the Ravindra fraudulently or by practicing fraud on the said committee, the remand exercise will be a futile one. 17. Once it is found that Ravindra is related to the petitioner by blood, the view already taken by this Court in Apoorvas case will apply with its full force. The Caste Scrutiny Committee has brushed aside this very lightly by observing that Ravindra is a distant relative, which in fact, is not so in the light of the facts stated above. 18. In that view of the matter, we have no hesitation in our mind to record a finding that the order dated 28.01.2011 in Case No. DD/TCSC/AMT/BDT/I-04/05 is not tenable in law and it is quashed and set aside. It is declared that the petitioner belongs to Thakur-Scheduled Tribe. The respondent-Committee is directed to issue validity certificate to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.