(1.) The petitioners' claim of belonging to ' Koli Malhar scheduled tribe has been discarded by the respondent No. 2-scrutiny committee in a proceeding under Sec. 6 of the Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001.
(2.) The learned advocate for the petitioners would submit that the committee has resorted to and relied upon several entries in the name of individuals who are not in blood relation with the petitioners. They had specifically denied such relationship in their reply filed to the vigilance report. The committee has ignored several validities in the blood relation. Even if there are few invalidities as well, since it is a matter of proof regarding the tribe claim, merely because some blood relations were unable to lead sufficient evidence and could not convince the committee about their claim, those invalidities would be individual centric and cannot bind the other blood relations. He would submit that the committee has not doubted the genealogy and the blood relations being relied upon by the petitioners particularly with the validity holders. If that is so, even if the committee has entertained a doubt about the alleged fraud having been practised by some of the validity holders in obtaining validity certificates, it would be a matter of independent scrutiny and the decision would be individual centric. If the petitioners are able to substantiate their case on the basis of cogent and convincing evidence, the approach of the committee in discarding their claim merely on the basis of the suspicion being entertained by the members of the committee is not legally sustainable.
(3.) The learned advocate for the petitioners submits that in the light of the fact that several conditional validities have been issued by virtue of the orders of this Court in the matters of blood relations, the petitioners are ready to run the risk and may be granted conditional validities. It can be made subject to the outcome of the matters being reconsidered by the committee in respect of the validity holders.