Oral Judgment:
Nandesh S. Deshpande, J.
1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Matter is finally heard by consent of the parties.
2. The present petition challenges the rejection of validity certificate by Respondent No. 2-the Schedule Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee vide order dated 24th January 2024.
3. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has taken us through the family tree appended at Page 56 of the petition, which forms part of the affidavit filed by the Scrutiny Committee. The father of the Petitioner, namely Shashank, has been granted a validity certificate, appended at Page 65 of the petition.
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that as many as eight validities exist in the family, and it was not open for the Scrutiny Committee to reject the validity certificate on flimsy grounds. He has taken us through the impugned order, wherein the reasons recorded by the Scrutiny Committee is that the caste ‘Thakar’ found in leaving certificate of petitioner’s cousin grandfather namely Raghoba Bapu Atak dated 01.06.1956 is written as ‘Thakar Magaslela’ (Thakar Backward) and the word ‘Thakar’ in the said document is written with red pen and signed.
6. The committee has further stated that petitioner’s father has obtained N.T. certificate and later on obtained ST certificate and the traits of the petitioner’s does not reflects as followed by the ‘Thakar’ tribe.
7. Per contra, the learned AGP supported the impugned order.
8. We have considered the submissions and perused the record. It is an admitted fact on record that as many as eight validities exist in the family of the Petitioner, the details of which are reproduced below:
“IMAGE”
9. The Scrutiny Committee erred in holding that the caste “Thakar” belongs to the Nomadic Tribe. The reasoning adopted is inapt, perverse, and cannot be approved by this Court. The question is no longer res integra in view of the Judgment in Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale v. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1 & Ors., 2011((2010(6) Mh.L.J. 401)), namely, that once validity has been granted to a close blood relative on the same material, a contrary view cannot ordinarily be taken in the absence of fraud or any other distinguishing feature.
10. As regards the other reasons given in flatulent legal tomes order of committee which includes rejection on the ground of area restriction, ancestral traits of the petitioner and discrepancy of writing in old document, they are also discarded in view of the law laid down in judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Jaywant Dilip Pawar vs State of Maharashtra and others(2018(5) All MR 975 (S.C.),), Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims & Ors((2012) 1 SCC 113) and Sayanna v. State of Maharashtra(2010 (1) ALL MR 957 (SC)) respectively.
11. In that view of the matter, the reasoning of the Scrutiny Committee is perverse and without application of mind, warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. Hence, We pass the following order:
ORDER
I. The Writ Petition is allowed.
II. The impugned order dated 24th January 2024 passed by Respondent No. 2-the Schedule Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee is hereby quashed and set aside.
III. Respondent No. 2- the Schedule Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee is directed to issue a validity certificate in favor of the Petitioner that he belongs to “Thakar” Scheduled Tribe within a period of four weeks from today.
IV. The petition is allowed and disposed of.
V. All parties to act on a server copy of this order.
12. At this stage, we are informed that the interview schedule of the Petitioner for IIT is scheduled for tomorrow. The non-production of the validity certificate shall not be an obstruction in the interview to be held tomorrow.
