SMT. MANISHA JAGANNATH RAJWADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH SECRETARY, DEPT OF TRIBAL DEPT AND ORS

2026:BHC-AS:6647-DB


                Bhogale                                             9.wp-10000-2013.odt



                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                WRIT PETITION NO.10000 OF 2013

               Smt. Manisha d/o Jagannath Rajwade,
               Age-44 years, Occ. Lower Division Clerk/Typist,
               R/o-“Renuka”, Madhumangal Colony,
               Dindori Road, Opp: Reliance Fresh,
               Post-Meri Colony, Nashik-4.                   … Petitioner
                      Versus
               1. The State of Maharashtra
                  Department of Tribal Development,
                  Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
                  Through its Secretary.
                  (Copy to be served on the Government
                  Pleader, High Court of Bombay,
                  Bench at Aurangabad)

               2. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny
                  Committee, Nashik Division,
                  Gadkari Chowk, 2nd Floor, Adiwasi Vikas
                  Bhawan, Nashik-422 002
                  Through its Member Secretary.

               3. The Sub Divisional Magistrate,
                  Nashik City Division, Nashik.

               4. The Superintending Engineer (Urban Circle),
                  Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution
                  Co. Ltd., Nashik Urban Circle,
                  Prosper Park, Shingada Talav,
                  Nashik-Pune Road, Nashik-1.

               5. The Executive Engineer,
                  Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co.
                  Ltd., City Division No.2, Nashik Road          .… Respondents
                                               ****


                                             1
 Bhogale                                                 9.wp-10000-2013.odt



Adv. R. K. Mendadkar a/w Adv. Jagadish C. Kawale, Adv. Jayshri
Mendadkar, for the Petitioner.
Mr. N. C. Walimbe, Addl.G.P. a/w Mr. V. G. Badgujar, AGP, for the
Respondent-State.
Adv. A.R.S. Baxi, for Respondent No.4.
                               ****
                              CORAM : M. S. KARNIK &
                                        S. M. MODAK, JJ.
                                 DATE :    6th FEBRUARY, 2026

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER M. S. KARNIK, J.) :


1.         Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.         The caste certificate of the Petitioner as belonging to the

‘Thakur, Scheduled Tribe’ issued on 26 th August 1986 is invalidated

by the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee by the impugned

order dated 7th October 2013.

3.         The school record of the grandfather of the Petitioner

from the paternal side shows his duly recorded tribe as ‘Thakur’.

This certificate is dated 26th April 1922. Further, the school record

of the father of the Petitioner describes his tribe as ‘Thakur’. The

school record of the Petitioner’s father dates back to 19 th July

1947. By the Constitution (Scheduled Tribe) Order, 1950 ‘Thakur’

is recognised as a Scheduled Tribe throughout the State of

Maharashtra. These documents relied upon by the Petitioner have

great probative value, being pre-constitutional documents.

                                2
 Bhogale                                                       9.wp-10000-2013.odt



4.         It is pertinent to note that the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny

Committee granted a certificate of validity to the real sister of the

Petitioner viz. Rajshree Jagannath Rajwade on 20 th November

2002. The Scrutiny Committee has also granted a certificate of

validity to the real brother of the Petitioner viz. Tushar Jagannath

Rajwade on 22nd June 2001.

5.         While granting the certificate of validity to Rajshree the

Scrutiny Committee has observed thus :-

           “ The case of Smt. Rajshree Jagannath Rajwade has been
           remanded back by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at
           Bombay vide order in Writ Petition quoted in the preamble at
           Sr. No.(5) above for verification of her tribe claim.

           WHEREAS after gone through the documents, facts and replies
           given by the applicant and considering the various orders
           passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Mumbai in
           W.P. No.2746/98, 5454/98, 856/98 and the order of the
           Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay bench at
           Aurangabad in W.P. No.4123 of 1999, the Caste Certificate of
           Smt. Rajshree Jagannath Rajwade as belonging to Thakur,
           Sheculed Tribe bearing No.POL/II/SR/33/82 dated 18.8.1982
           issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nasik City, Nasik is
           held valid.
           This decision is applicable in this case only.”


6.         Likewise, so far as Tushar is concerned the Scrutiny

Committee while granting the validity certificate has observed

thus :-

           “WHEREAS after gone through the documents, facts and
           replies given by the applicant and considering the various
           orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at


                                      3
 Bhogale                                                       9.wp-10000-2013.odt



           Mumbai in W.P. No.2746/98, 5454/98, 856/98, the Caste
           Certificate of Shri Tushar Jagannath Rajwade bearing
           No.POL/II/SR/101/1986 dated 22.9.1986 issued by the Sub
           Divisional Magistrate, Nasik City Division, Nasik as belonging
           to Thakur, Scheduled Tribe is held valid.”

7.         Mr. Walimbe, learned Additional Government Pleader on

behalf of the Respondents supported the impugned order.

Our attention is invited to the detailed affidavit-in-reply filed by

the Respondents as well as the reasons in the impugned order in

which, according to the learned Additional Government Pleader,

for cogent reasons, the materials relied upon by the Petitioner have

been discarded.

8.         Having carefully perused the impugned order as well as

the affidavit-in-reply, we find that the Scrutiny Committee while

discarding the caste validity certificates of the real brother and

sister of the Petitioner relied upon, observed that the decisions of

this Court relied by the then Scrutiny Committee, was not in

consonance with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

It is therefore seen that the Scrutiny Committee re-examined the

decision of the then Scrutiny Committee, virtually sitting in appeal

over the decision.

9.         Moreover, we find that the then Scrutiny Committee, on

the basis of the documents, the materials on record and after

                                    4
 Bhogale                                                 9.wp-10000-2013.odt



relying upon the decisions mentioned therein was satisfied that the

tribe claim of the real sister and brother of the Petitioner deserves

to be validated. The issuance of the certificates to the blood

relatives was after considering the materials and recording a

subjective satisfaction after following the due procedure. In our

opinion, the Scrutiny Committee, which passed the impugned

order, could not have sat in appeal over the decision of the then

Scrutiny Committee which issued the certificates of validity to the

real brother and sister of the Petitioner. It is not the case of the

Respondents that the said validity certificates to close blood

relatives were issued without holding a Vigilance Cell enquiry.

There is no dispute that the caste validity certificates issued to the

brother and sister of the Petitioner are genuine documents. The

relationship of the Petitioner with the holders of such certificates

of validity is not disputed, and further the certificate was issued

after following the due procedure.

10.        Further, we find that no show cause notice has been

issued to the real sister and brother of the Petitioner and the

certificates of validity issued to them are valid and subsisting. In

the context of a situation where a claim is made for issuance of the



                               5
    Bhogale                                                          9.wp-10000-2013.odt



certificate of validity on the basis that close blood relatives have

been issued the certificates of validity, the Hon’ble Supreme Court

in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti vs. State

of Maharashtra and Others1 has laid down the following three

essential prerequisites.

              (i)       The applicant must establish a clear and specific
              relationship with the person in whose favour the validity
              certificate has been issued;


              (ii)     The Scrutiny Committee must verify whether the
              validity certificate was granted to the applicant’s blood
              relative after due enquiry and in accordance with
              prescribed procedure; and

              (iii)   The Scrutiny Committee must ascertain the
              genuineness of the validity certificate relied upon.

11.           Further, this Court in Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale vs.

Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1 and others 2

has in paragraph 4 observed thus :-

              “4.     We have considered the matter and we are of the view
              that the petitioner's caste claim that she belongs to Kanjar Bhat-
              Nomadic Tribe ought to have been accepted by the Committee
              merely on the basis that identical caste claim of her sister that
              she belongs to Kanjar Bhat has been allowed by the Committee,
              even apart from the Government Resolution. We are of the
              opinion that the guidelines provided by the said Govt.
              Resolution are sound and based on sound principles. It would
              indeed be chaotic otherwise. If the relationship by blood is
              established or not doubted, and one such relative has been

1    (2023) 16 SCC 415
2    2010(6) Mh.L.J. 401


                                        6
    Bhogale                                                         9.wp-10000-2013.odt



              confirmed as belonging to a particular caste, there is no reason
              why public time or money should be spent in the committee
              testing the same evidence and making the same conclusion
              unless of course the Committee finds on the evidence that the
              validity of the certificate of such relation has been obtained by
              fraud.”

12.           We find that the aforesaid decisions squarely cover the

Petitioner’s case.

13.           The other reason why the Scrutiny Committee has

invalidated the tribe claim is the affinity test. The Hon’ble Supreme

Court in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti

(supra) has held that affinity test is neither a litmus test nor a

determinative test. The documents on record and especially if the

same are pre-constitutional documents have a much higher

probative value. This ground on which the caste claim is

invalidated is therefore unsustainable.

14.           The rejection of the tribe claim on the ground of area

restrictions is again untenable in view of the decision of this Court

in Motilal Namdev Pawar vs. Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny

Committee Through its Member Secretary and Others3 (paragraph

23 to 29) which has removed the area restrictions.




3    2017 SCC OnLine Bom 9778


                                       7
                              Bhogale                                                9.wp-10000-2013.odt



                           15.          At the cost of repetition, these are pre-constitutional

                           documents in support of Petitioner’s claim having a higher

                           probative value. The Scrutiny Committee does not doubt the

                           genuineness of these documents/extracts. In such view of the

                           matter, we are of the opinion that the order passed by the Scrutiny

                           Committee cannot be sustained.

                           16.          The impugned order is quashed and set aside.

                           17.          The Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue certificate of

                           validity to the Petitioner as belonging to the ‘Thakur, Scheduled

                           Tribe’ within a period of six weeks from the date of communication

                           of this order.

                           18.          The Writ Petition is disposed of.



                           (S. M. MODAK, J.)                                   (M. S. KARNIK, J.)




Signed by: Pradnya Bhogale
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 09/02/2026 19:20:31                                     8