Bombay High Court
VIJAY BALU SIDDHAGAVALIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY SOCIAL JUSTICE DEPT. AND ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The order of the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the petitioner's tribe claim is quashed and the matter is remanded for fresh consideration.
Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Balu Siddhagavali, claimed membership in the Masanjogi Nomadic Tribe and submitted a caste certificate to the District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee for verification. The Committee, after a vigilance inquiry, invalidated his claim on the basis that his cousin, a validity certificate holder, denied any blood relation with him. The petitioner later produced an affidavit from the cousin admitting the relationship and presented additional validity certificates of other blood relatives issued after the impugned order. Relying on these subsequent developments, the petitioner sought a fresh consideration of his tribe claim. The High Court quashed the Committee’s order, remanded the matter for fresh consideration, and directed the petitioner to appear before the Committee, thereby disposing of the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee erred in invalidating the petitioner's claim to the Masanjogi Nomadic Tribe on the ground of alleged lack of blood relation.
- Whether the subsequent affidavits and validity certificates of blood relatives warrant setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter for fresh consideration.
Subjects
- caste certificate
- tribal status
- validity certificate
- scrutiny committee
- writ petition
- remand
- reservation
- Masanjogi Nomadic Tribe
Judgment
902-WP-3777-2022 (C)-J.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 3777 OF 2022
Vijay Balu Siddhagavali,
Aged 30 Years, Residing at
Chavan Colony, Ashta,
Taluka : Walva, District : Sangli. ...Petitioner.
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through Its Secretary,
Social Justice Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32.
2. District Caste Certiicate
Scrutiny Committee, Sangli
Through it’s Member Secretary,
Having its oice at
Dr. Babasaheb Amedkar Samajik
Nyay Bhavan, Old Budhgaon Road,
District : Sangli – 416 416.
3. Sub Divisional Oicer,
(Revenue), Walwa Division,
Islampur, District : Sangli. ....Respondents.
——————
Mr. Shantanu B. Patil with Mr. Kunal Nalwade, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel, AGP, for the Respondents-State.
——————
Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
Reserved on : September 11, 2026.
Pronounced on : September 22, 2026.
Gaikwad RD 1 of 5
902-WP-3777-2022 (C)-J.doc
JUDGMENT : (Per Neeraj P. Dhote, J.)
1. Heard inally by consent of both the sides at the admission stage.
2. Impugned in this writ petition is the order dated 24 th December
2021 passed by the Respondent No. 2 - Scrutiny Committee invalidating
the claim of the Petitioner towards 'Masanjogi' Nomadic Tribe.
3. The Petitioner claims to be belonging to the 'Masanjogi' Nomadic
Tribe. He is having the caste certiicate to that efect. Since the
Petitioner wanted to pursue further education from the reserved seat,
he submitted his caste certiicate for veriication to the Respondent
No.2-Scrutiny Committee. The Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee
referred the Petitioner's claim for vigilance inquiry. After receipt of the
Vigilance inquiry report, the Petitioner was given opportunity of
hearing. The Petitioner relied on several documents in support of his
claim. By the impugned order, the claim came to be invalidated mainly
on the ground that, the validity holder denied his blood relations with
the Petitioner.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that, one
of the documents relied upon by the Petitioner in support of his caste
claim was the validity certiicate of his cousin brother-Sainath, who
initially, due to misunderstanding, submitted the aidavit before the
Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee denying blood relations with the
Gaikwad RD 2 of 5
902-WP-3777-2022 (C)-J.doc
Petitioner. He further submitted that, when the said cousin brother-
Sainath came to know his blood relations with the Petitioner, he has
submitted the aidavit in this writ petition admitting the blood
relations with the Petitioner. He further submitted that, there are three
validity holders in the blood relations of the Petitioners, namely, Pratik
Rajendra Siddhagavali, Aditya Mahesh Siddhagavali and Lokesh Krishna
Siddhagavali. He submitted that, once the blood relatives of the
Petitioners are issued the validity certiicates towards the same caste,
the Petitioner is entitle for the validity certiicate. He submitted that,
the matter be remanded to the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee
for reconsideration in view of the subsequent developments.
5. It is submitted by learned AGP that, since the Petitioner's cousin
brother-Sainath, having the validity certiicate, denied the blood
relations with the Petitioner, the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee
has rightly invalidated the tribe claim and therefore, no interference is
called for in the impugned order.
6. Perusal of the papers enclosed with this writ petition goes to
show that, the Petitioner had submitted the genealogy by way of the
aidavit before the Scrutiny Committee. The said genealogy is
reproduced below:
Gaikwad RD 3 of 5
902-WP-3777-2022 (C)-J.doc
Marayappa siddhagavali
(Great Great Grand Father)
Govindappa Gangaram
(Great Grand Father) (Paternal Great Grand Father)
Balu Sanjay
(Father) (Paternal Uncle)
Vijay Sainath
(Self) (Cousin Brother)
7. There appears no dispute about the said genealogy. The
impugned order goes to show that, though the Petitioner submitted in
all 18 documents in support of his claim, he mainly relied on the validity
certiicate of his cousin brother-Sainath, who denied the blood relation
with the Petitioner. The Petitioner relies on the aidavit of Sainath
Sanjay Gavali stating that, due to misunderstanding, he denied his relation
with the Petitioner, when the matter was under consideration before
Respondent No.2–Scrutiny Committee, however, later on he learnt that the
Petitioner was his relative from the paternal side and his validity
certiicate was being relied by the Petitioner. Further, the Petitioner has
tendered the additional aidavit alongwith the copies of the validity
certiicates dated 6th January 2026, 11th February 2026 and 16th June
2026 in respect of his blood relatives, which are subsequent to the order
impugned.
Gaikwad RD 4 of 5
902-WP-3777-2022 (C)-J.doc
8. In view of the above subsequent events, the ends to justice would
meet, if the order impugned is set aside and the matter is remanded to
the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee for reconsideration and
passing appropriate order by giving opportunity to the Petitioner to
prove his relations with the validity holders, namely, Sainath, Pratik,
Aditya and Lokesh. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
i) The order dated 24th December 2021 passed by Respondent
No. 2 – Scrutiny Committee invalidating the Petitioner's claim
towards 'Masanjogi' Nomadic Tribe is quashed and set aside.
ii) The Petitioner's tribe claim is remanded to the Respondent
No.2-Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration and decision
in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to the
Petitioner to prove his relations with the validity holders.
iii) The Petitioner shall appear before the Respondent No.2-
Scrutiny Committee on 28th September 2026.
iv) The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of.
[Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]
Digitally
signed by
RAJU
RAJU DATTATRAYA
DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD Date:
2026.09.22
18:00:55
+0530
Gaikwad RD 5 of 5
Checking your session…