SNEHAL VIJAYSINGH THOKE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD. Rule. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith.

(2.) BY this writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 20-10-2000 passed by the respondent No. 2 Scrutiny Committee for verification of the caste certificates issued in favour of the persons belonging to the Vimukta Jati. By the impugned order, the committee has declared invalid, the certificate No. 95/misc/w/1213 dated 22-4-1993 issued by the Executive Magistrate, Georai, in favour of the petitioner, certifying that she belongs to V. J. (Rajput Bhamta ). 2. The petitioner is a first year student of Medical College. According to her she belongs to Rajput Bhamta Caste. At the time of her admission in Yogeshwari Nutan Vidayalaya, Ambajogai, District Beed, her caste was recorded as Rajput Bhamta in the school record. While she was studying in XI standard her caste claim was sent for verification to the Scrutiny Committee. Earlier the Scrutiny Committee, after obtaining a report from Social Welfare Officer, had invalidated the caste claim of the petitioner. The petitioner approached this Court by Writ Petition No. 428 of 2000 because that decision was without calling for a report from the Vigilance Committee. By the judgment dated 26-11-1999, this Court set aside the judgment of the Scrutiny Committee and further directions were issued to redetermine the caste claim of the petitioner, only after obtaining the report from a Vigilance Committee. As per directions of the High Court, the Scrutiny Committee obtained a report from the Vigilance Committee and thereafter, issued notice dated 2-9-2000 to the petitioner. The caste claim was thereafter, invalidated by the impugned order.

(3.) THE committee, by the impugned order has taken into consideration as many as 26 documents, in support of the caste claim, either submitted by the petitioner or received by the committee, along with report of the Vigilance Cell. It took a note that in the school record of the father of the petitioner, his caste is recorded as Hindu. The same was recorded as Hindu (Rajput Bhamta) in his higher medium school record. The enquiry revealed that the portion Rajput Bhamta was added by Secretary Shri Shankar Hanumant Chilka, on the basis of the application of the father dated 30-8-1999 accompanied by the affidavit. The service record of the petitioners father showed his caste as Hindu (Rajput) (Rajput Bhamta ). However, this entry was taken on the basis of caste certificate obtained by the father on 24-3-1993. It has also taken a note that the school record of the petitioner as well as her cousin records their cast as Rajput Bhamta and caste claims of second degree cousins of petitioner, namely Shital Bhausingh Thoke and Yogita Bhausingh Thoke of belonging to Rajput Bhamta caste are held valid by the Scrutiny Committee in the years 1996-97 and 1998-99 respectively. The committee in its order, relied upon the observations of Apex Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil to the effect that the entries in the school record of father of the petitioner are an important piece of evidence and arrived at a conclusion that father, in order to obtain benefits available to the scheduled tribe has manipulated his school record by the application dated 30-8-1999. According to the committee, this was evident from the fact that prior to this application, fathers caste in the school record was recorded as Hindu (Non Backward Class ). According to the committee, favourable entry in the service record of the father taken on the basis of the certificate in his favour issued by the Executive Magistrate, Gevrai on 24-3-1993 stood on no better footing, in view of the facet that Rajput Bhamta was declared to be Vimukt Jati by the Government decision dated 21-11-1961 and there was not a single piece of evidence, registering the caste of the petitioner or her ancestors to be Rajput Bhamta prior to this date. According to the committee, school records of grand father and paternal uncles, were not available because they were un-educated. The old record about criminal tendency was also not available in police record. The certificate certifying the caste to be Rajput Bhamta pertaining to the petitioner, her sisters, brothers, father etc. were issued on the same day i. e. 22-4-1993 and 24-4-1993 by the Executive Magistrate, Gevrai. Thus, according to the committee, the strongest and oldest piece of evidence favourable to the caste claim was the entry in school record dated 13-7-1985 of the caste of the petitioner to be Rajput Bhamta which was contradicted by her fathers school record. The petitioner did not possess any document of a date prior to 13-7-1985, which could have been strong and reliable piece of evidence. In view of these observations, the committee declared the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner to be invalid.