Nandesh S. Deshpande, J.

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, Petition is finally heard.

2. The present petition challenges the rejection of the caste validity claim by Respondent No. 2-The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Verification Committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘Scrutiny Committee’) vide order dated 20th February 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that pre-constitutional entries were not relied upon by the Scrutiny Committee. The reasons given by the Scrutiny Committee to reject the claim is that the Petitioner’s cousin brother namely Sanjay Nagesh Thakur has obtained caste validity certificate by deceit and suppression of facts. Further, the reason given by the Scrutiny Committee is that the traits/customs followed by the Petitioner's family is different from that of the ‘Thakar’ tribe.

4. On the other hand, the learned AGP supports the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of the Petition.

5. We have considered the submissions and perused the record. The reasoning given for invalidation is the alleged suppression by one Sanjay Nagesh Thakur. According to the Scrutiny Committee, the said person suppressed certain documents to obtain a caste certificate. The Scrutiny Committee further in its impugned order has stated that they had given a show cause notice to Sanjay Nagesh Thakur as to why his caste validity certificate should not be cancelled. As per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale v. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1 & Ors., 2011((2010(6) Mh.L.J. 401),), has observed 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.

6. In our view, this entire exercise is beyond jurisdiction. Since the Scrutiny Committee, as per settled principles of law, has no power to review its own order. Even otherwise, there is nothing on record to show that a show-cause notice was issued to Sanjay Nagesh Thakur except a passing remark in the impugned order. Even accepting the reasoning regarding suppression, it does not lie within the domain of the Scrutiny Committee to invalidate the Petitioner's claim without following due process. Rather, regarding the caste claim, the family tree and pre-constitutional entry of Gaav Namuna No. 14 dated 8th November 1938 of Jayram Sakharam Waghe Thakar who is father of the present Petitioner shows the caste ‘Thakar’.

7. In that view of the matter, the order of the Scrutiny Committee is perverse and contrary to settled propositions of law laid down by this Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims & Ors((2012) 1 SCC 113), wherein it is observed that affinity test is not a litmus test especially when there are documentary evidence, pre-constitutional documents have greater probative value and must be considered independently.

8. In that view of the matter, we pass the following order:

                    I. The order dated 20th February 2023 passed by Respondent No. 2 is quashed and set aside. It is declared that the Petitioner belongs to the ‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe.

                    II. Respondent No. 2 Committee is directed to issue a caste validity certificate within four weeks from today.

                    III. Rule is made absolute in above terms.

9. The petition is allowed and disposed of.