SAMRIDDHI YOGESH SAVALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of both the sides, the petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, read with Sec. 7(2) of the Maharashtra Act No. XXIII of 2001 (hereinafter 'the Act'), the petitioner is taking an exception to the judgment and order passed by respondent no. 2 - scheduled tribe certificate scrutiny committee (hereinafter 'the committee'), whereby it has refused to validate her 'Tokre Koli' scheduled tribe certificate and directed it to be confiscated and cancelled, in a proceeding under that Act.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that there are pre-constitutional school record and birth and death record maintained in the ordinary course, describing the petitioner's forefathers as 'Dhor Koli' or 'Tokre Koli'. He would submit that though 'Dhor Koli' and 'Tokre Koli' sound different, they are covered by the same entry at serial no.28 of the Presidential Order. He would submit that even in the government resolution dtd. 24/4/1985 while laying down guidelines, Tribal Welfare Department of the state had expressly observed that 'Dhor Koli' was at the lowest rung and the persons belonging to it were treated as untouchables and expressly declaring this category of community being known as 'Dhor Koli', 'Tokre Koli', 'Kolcha' and 'Kolgha'. Consequently, all these entries find place at serial number 28. He would submit that appreciating such state-of-affairs, even this Court in the matter of Nilesh Gulab Sonawane and another Vs. State of Maharashtra and others (writ petition no. 9654 of 2019 decided on 18/10/2023) has expressly concluded that the entries as 'Koli Dhor' or 'Tokre Koli' could not be read as contrary or inconsistent entries.