BHUSHAN RAJENDRA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned AGP appearing for the Respondent-State. The caste claim of the Petitioner as belonging to the 'Koli Mahadev, Scheduled Tribe' has been invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee. Inviting our attention to the impugned order, learned AGP in support of the impugned order submitted that the Scrutiny Committee has for cogent reasons invalidated the caste claim of the Petitioner. Learned counsel for the Petitioner in support of the caste claim submitted that the Scrutiny Committee was not justified in discarding the caste validity certificate issued to the Petitioner's father on 31/08/2007 [page 83 of the Petition].

(2.) We have considered the rival submissions. Having gone through the findings of the Scrutiny Committee in the impugned order, we find that the material in the form of caste validity certificate of the Petitioner's father has been discarded on the ground that there are discrepancies in the entries relating to the caste of the Petitioner's father when the matter was considered by the Scrutiny Committee which issued the certificate of validity to the Petitioner's father.

(3.) We have perused the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of Respondent No.2- Scrutiny Committee which is at page 115 of the Petition. There is no dispute that the Petitioner's father being a close blood relative of the Petitioner has been issued with the certificate of validity by the Scrutiny Committee. The Petitioner made a claim for grant of validity certificate since a close blood relative of his, has been issued with a certificate of validity. This Court in the case of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale Vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1 and others, 2010 (6) Mh.L.J. 401 in paragraph 4 observed thus :