JAI NARAYAN SHAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is by nine writ petitioners. All of them sought issuance of Scheduled Tribe certificates in their favour. Each one of them contended that he belongs to Gond community. There is no dispute that the community known as 'Gond' is a Scheduled Tribe community. There is also no dispute that the communities known as 'Goad' or 'Goud' and 'Gonr' or "Gour" do not belong to Scheduled Tribe community. An attempt made by the State of Bihar to treat them equally has been struck down by the Central Government and the said decision of the Central Government has been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court.

(2.) In Hindi these communities are spelt as (sic) Each of the petitioners contended before the authorities concerned that it would be evidenced from the title deeds of ancient time obtained by their fathers or grand fathers that the father or the grand father of each of the petitioners belong to "Gond" community.

(3.) A learned Single Judge of this Court in Sumit Anand v. State of Bihar and Ors. reported in 2002 (3) PLJR 393, has held that when in ancient documents and particularly in documents which were registered before the reservation laws were introduced, the Registrar has recorded the caste of a person in the document, such caste should be treated to be a declaration of the caste of that person by the Registrar after making appropriate investigation for it was obligatory on the part of the Registrar to be satisfied as to the caste of such person. It was contended that in very many such ancient registered documents the Registrar has treated the fathers and grand fathers of the petitioners as "Gond" and accordingly the petitioners should be declared to be belonging to Scheduled Tribe community, and accordingly such caste certificates should be issued in their favour.