ADITYA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Sec. 7(2) of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 (herein after the Act), wherein, the petitioner is challenging the order passed by the respondent No.2 - Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee (herein after the Committee) constituted under Sec. 6 of the Act, wherein, the tribe certificate of the petitioner as "Mannervarlu" scheduled tribe has been confiscated and cancelled under Sec. 7 (1) of the Act.

(2.) The learned Senior advocate Mr. Sapkal for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the first person from the family seeking the benefit of reservation. None of his relatives have secured any validity certificate. He belongs to "Mannervarlu" scheduled tribe. School record was produce before the Committee. It was also collected during vigilance inquiry and was available to be looked into by the Committee. There was no interpolation or overwriting. None was noticed during vigilance inquiry. The favourable entries from the school record of the blood relatives have been discarded for no valid reason, whereas, contrary school record of the persons who do not stand in any relation with the petitioner have been accepted to discard the petitioner's claim. Some human error in the school record committed by the concerned staff of the school while making entries in the school register could not have been made capital of. This Court in the matter of Sanjay Haribhau Munnur Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others; Writ Petition No.3223/2002 decided on 13/9/2017 has considered the aspect in describing the tribe "Mannervarlu". In that case the school record referred to the name of the tribe as "Munnervarlu" instead of "Mannervarlu". The latter being tribe duly recognized by the presidential order, this Court had treated use of word "Munnervarlu" which is an unrecognized caste or tribe as "Mannervarlu". Therefore the inference drawn by the Committee in the present matter merely because some school record of the blood relations used description as [XXXXXXXX] (Munervarlu), [XXXXXXXX] (Munnervarlu), [XXXXXXXX] (Munurvarlu) [XXXXXXXX] (Manner-varlu) and [XXXXXXXX] (Manurvar) could not have been used as adverse entries. There were few other entries of the blood relations correctly describing the tribe as "Mannervarlu". The inference drawn by the Committee is therefore perverse and arbitrary.

(3.) Mr. Sapkal would further submit that in spite of the decision in the matter of Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.; 2023 SCC Online SC 326 the Committee has applied the affinity test which approach is unsustainable in law and is arbitrary. Mr. Sapkal would submit that there was no concrete reason for the Committee to discard the claim by drawing inference based on conjectures and the petition be allowed.