Bombay High Court
BHUPENDRA JAGANNATH PATILversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH SECRETARY, TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- M S KARNIKS M MODAK
Holding
The Scrutiny Committee erred in invalidating the petitioner’s ST claim on the basis of a later school record; the pre‑constitutional, verified documents establish his belonging to the Koli Malhar Scheduled Tribe.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhupendra Jagannath Patil, challenged the order of the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee that invalidated his claim to belong to the Koli Malhar Scheduled Tribe on the ground of an inconsistent school record showing ‘Koli Mahadeo’. The Court examined pre‑constitutional school records of the petitioner’s paternal ancestors, all indicating ‘Koli Malhar’, which were verified by the Vigilance Cell. It held that the later school entry could not outweigh the earlier, verified documents and that the affinity test is not a mandatory litmus test for caste verification. Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti v. State of Maharashtra, the Court found the Scrutiny Committee’s approach erroneous. Consequently, the petition was allowed, the impugned order quashed, and the Committee directed to issue a valid ST certificate to the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether a discrepancy between the petitioner’s recent school record and earlier ancestral records invalidates his claim to the Koli Malhar Scheduled Tribe.
- Whether the affinity test is a mandatory requirement for verification of Scheduled Tribe status.
- Whether pre‑constitutional documents verified by the Vigilance Cell are sufficient evidence to establish Scheduled Tribe status.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Scheduled Tribe certificate
- Caste verification
- Affinity test
- Pre‑constitutional documents
- Scrutiny Committee
- Invalidation of caste claim
- Certificate of validity
Judgment
Ingale 5-WP-1441-13.odt
Digitally signed
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
URMILA by URMILA
PRAMOD
PRAMOD INGALE
Date:
INGALE 2026.02.03
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
18:06:38 +0530
WRIT PETITION NO. 1441 OF 2013
Bhupendra Jagannath Patil
aged 38 years, residing at Sector 34,
Kamothe, Tal. Panvel, Dist. Raigad-410209. … Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra
through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Konkan Division,
Thane through its Member Secretary,
having its office at Vartak Nagar,
Opp. Kores Company, Vedant Complex,
Vartak Nagar, Thane (E),
Dist. Thane
3. Sub Divisional Officer,
Alibag, Sub Division, Alibag,
Dist. Raigad
4. Airports Authority of India
through its Deputy General
Manager, H.R. having its office at
Western Region Hqrs
New Airport Colony, Vile Parle (E),
Mumbai 400 099. .… Respondents
****
Mr.R.K. Mendadkar a/w Mr.Jagdish C. Kawale, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Ajay Khaire a/w Ms. Meenal Wadhwa, Ms. Priya Kumari i/b
The Law Point, for the Respondent No.4
Mr. A.I. Patel, Addl. GP a/w Smt. D.S.Deshmukh, AGP, for
Respondent-State.
[
****
1
Ingale 5-WP-1441-13.odt
CORAM : M.S.KARNIK &
S.M.MODAK, JJ.
DATE : 02nd FEBRUARY 2026
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER M.S.KARNIK, J. ) :
1. The order passed by the respondent no.2- Scheduled Tribe
Certificate Scrutiny Committee (‘Scrutiny Committee’, for short)
invalidating the tribe claim of the petitioner as belonging to
‘Malhar Koli, Scheduled Tribe’ is under challenge. The Scrutiny
Committee, by the impugned order, held that though the
documents relied by the petitioner are pre-constitutional
documents of blood relatives from the paternal side and have
probative value, the same cannot be relied upon in support of his
case as the petitioner’s school leaving certificate records his caste
as ‘Mahadeo Koli’, whereas the documents relied upon by the
petitioner of his blood relatives records the caste as ‘Malhar Koli’.
This inconsistency in the caste entries found in the school record of
the petitioner with that of his blood relatives is the reason for
invalidating the caste claim of the petitioner.
2. We have perused the Vigilance Cell report and the
order passed by the Scrutiny Committee. Learned AGP appearing
2
Ingale 5-WP-1441-13.odt
for the respondent-State invited our attention to the impugned
order as well as the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the
respondents. Learned AGP submitted that when, in the school
records of the petitioner of recent origin, the entry recorded is
‘Mahadeo Koli’, then, this by itself is sufficient to invalidate the
tribe claim of the petitioner as ‘Koli Malhar’. It is further submitted
that the respondent no.2-Scrutiny Committee has found that the
petitioner has not been able to prove the affinity test. According to
learned AGP the impugned order is well reasoned which does not
call for any interference.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. We have
perused the memo of petition, the materials on record, the
impugned order and affidavit in reply filed by the respondents.
4. Mahadev Hiraji Patil is the cousin grandfather of the
petitioner. The birth extract indicates his caste as Malhar Koli.
The date of the entry is 02/06/1933. The said entry has been duly
verified by the Vigilance Cell. There is nothing on record to show
that the said document or the entry is doubtful.
5. The next document is that of petitioner’s grandfather
from paternal side. Janardan Hira Patil was admitted to the
3
Ingale 5-WP-1441-13.odt
primary school. His tribe claim is recorded as Koli Malhar. The
said entry is dated 10/10/1935 which has been verified by the
Vigilance Cell.
6. The petitioner’s father is Jagannath Janardan Patil who
was admitted to the primary school wherein the caste is recorded
as Koli Malhar. This entry is dated 11/06/1958 and has been duly
verified by the Vigilance Cell.
7. Moreover, the uncle of the petitioner from the paternal
side, Eknath Malhari Patil, was admitted in the primary school
where his tribe claim was shown as Koli Malhar. This entry is
dated 11/06/1958 and has been verified by the Scrutiny
Committee.
8. The record thus reveals that there are two pre-
constitutional documents duly verified by the Vigilance Cell. The
relationship of the petitioner with them is not in dispute.
9. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders
(Amendment) Act, 1976 came into force on 20/09/1976. So far as
the State of Maharashtra is concerned, the entry no. 30- ‘Koli
Malhar’ is notified as Scheduled Tribe throughout the State of
Maharashtra. Thus, we find that apart from the pre-constitutional
4
Ingale 5-WP-1441-13.odt
documents in support of the petitioner’s case, even records
pertaining to the petitioner’s father as well as his uncle from
paternal side are prior to the coming into force of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976.
10. The reason why these documents are discarded by the
Scrutiny Committee is that in the school record of the petitioner
for the year 1984, the petitioner’s caste is shown as ‘Koli Mahadeo’.
It is pertinent to bear in mind that the petitioner had approached
the respondent no.2- Scrutiny Committee for validating the caste
claim as belonging to Koli Malhar, Scheduled Tribe. The enquiry of
the Scrutiny Committee should have been restricted to whether
petitioner’s claim as belonging to ‘Koli Malhar, Scheduled Tribe’, is
to be validated or not. Only on the basis that the petitioner’s school
records indicate the entry as Koli Mahadev, the petitioner’s tribe
claim has been invalidated. This approach of the Scrutiny
Committee is erroneous. The Scrutiny Committee has not found
the documents aforementioned to be doubtful and in fact the
Vigilance Cell has verified these documents. The finding of the
Scrutiny Committee that the caste entry in the school records of
the petitioner is inconsistent with the aforementioned documents
5
Ingale 5-WP-1441-13.odt
and hence, does not support the caste claim of the petitioner, is
completely untenable. The approach of Scrutiny Committee is
therefore completely misconceived in proceeding on the premise
that as the petitioner’s entry in the school record is inconsistent
with the material evidence produced, the petitioner’s claim has to
be invalidated.
11. The affinity test is not a "litmus test" to decide a caste
claim and is not an essential part of the verification process in
every case. To support this position we make a profitable reference
to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Maharashtra
Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs. State of Maharashtra and
ors.1
12. The pre-constitutional documents relied upon by the
petitioner as well as the documents which are dated prior to the
coming into force of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976 duly verified by the Vigilance Cell
are relied upon such documents are of great probative value. The
Scrutiny Committee should have validated the caste claim of the
petitioner having regard to these documents produced by the
petitioner.
1 (2023) 16 SCC 415
6
Ingale 5-WP-1441-13.odt
13. The petition is therefore allowed.
14. The impugned order is quashed and set aside.
15. The Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue a
certificate of validity to the petitioner as belonging to ‘Koli Malhar,
Scheduled Tribe’ within a period of 6 weeks from the date of
communication of this order.
(S.M.MODAK, J.) (M.S.KARNIK, J.)
7
Checking your session…