Bombay High Court
SHRAVANI D/O RAJESH GAIKWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. SECRETARY DEPT. OF TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT AND ANR.
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The order of the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the petitioner’s Thakar Scheduled Tribe claim is set aside, and the petitioner is entitled to a validity certificate.
Summary
The petitioner, a 19‑year‑old student, claimed membership in the Thakar Scheduled Tribe and sought a caste validity certificate. The Scrutiny Committee invalidated her claim on the ground that her father’s earlier claim had been set aside for fraud, despite numerous paternal relatives holding valid certificates issued by the Court in earlier writ petitions. The petitioner argued that the Committee ignored those prior judgments and the genealogical evidence supporting her claim. The Court examined the earlier writ orders, noting that the father’s case was dismissed on procedural grounds and that the Court had previously upheld validity certificates for many paternal relatives. It held that the Committee’s reliance on alleged contra‑entries was untenable and that the petitioner could not be denied a certificate merely because of her father’s invalidation. Consequently, the Court quashed the Committee’s order, directed issuance of a validity certificate to the petitioner, and disposed of the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the Scrutiny Committee can invalidate a petitioner’s Scheduled Tribe claim solely on the basis of the father’s prior invalidation.
- Whether validity certificates granted to paternal relatives bind the Committee to grant a certificate to another relative.
- Whether the Committee’s reliance on alleged contra‑entries and prior fraud findings is legally permissible.
- Whether prior High Court orders setting aside show‑cause notices affect the present order.
Subjects
- Scheduled Tribe
- Caste certificate
- Validity certificate
- Scrutiny Committee
- Genealogy
- Fraud
- Writ petition
- Bombay High Court
Judgment
904-WP-4079-2026-J.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 4079 OF 2026
Shravani d/o Rajesh Gaikwad,
Age- 19 years, Occupation : Student,
R/o "Kaustubh", Near Blood Bank,
Satav Colony, Madha Road, Kurduwadi,
Taluka : Madha, District : Solapur-413 001. - Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Department of Tribal Development,
Mantralaya, Mumbai- 32.
Through its Secretary.
2. The Scheduled Tribe Certiicate
Scrutiny Committee, Pune Division,
5th Floor, C-Wing, Kapil Towers,
Near RTO Oice, Pune- 416 002.
Through its Member Secretary. ....Respondents.
——————
Mr. Saurabh Tandale with Mr. Shantanu Yeranwar (Through VC), Advocate for
the Petitioner.
Mr. N. C. Walimbe, Additional Government Pleader for the Respondents-State.
——————
Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
Reserved on : September 17, 2026.
Pronounced on : September 22, 2026.
JUDGMENT : (Per Neeraj P. Dhote, J.)
1. Heard inally by consent of both the sides at the admission stage.
Gaikwad RD 1 of 8
904-WP-4079-2026-J.doc
2. Impugned in this writ petition is the order dated 24 th July 2026
passed by the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee invalidating the
Petitioner's claim towards the ‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe. The Petitioner,
who is the student, claims to be belonging to the Thakar Scheduled
Tribe. The Competent Authority issued the caste certiicate to the
Petitioner as belonging to the ‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe. The educational
institution, where the Petitioner was taking education, referred the
Petitioner's claim to the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee for
veriication. The Petitioner submitted several documents in support of
her claim including the validities to the blood relatives pursuant to the
orders of this Court in various writ petitions. The Petitioner also
disclosed that, her father's claim towards the ‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe
was invalidated by the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee and the
said invalidation has attained inality. The Respondent No. 2 Scrutiny
Committee directed inquiry by the Vigilance Cell. The Vigilance Cell
conducted the necessary inquiry and submitted its report. The copy of
the Vigilance Cell report was served on the Petitioner. The Petitioner
gave her say to the report of Vigilance Cell. Considering the documents
available on record, the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee passed
the impugned order invalidating the Petitioner's tribe claim.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that there is
Gaikwad RD 2 of 8
904-WP-4079-2026-J.doc
no dispute in respect of the genealogy submitted before the Committee
by the Petitioner. The Vigilance Cell report shows the old entries of
‘Thakar’ in the documents of the blood relatives from the paternal side
of the Petitioner. There were some rejections in the blood relations of
the Petitioner. The Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee did not
consider the various validities granted in favour of the blood relatives of
the Petitioner from the paternal side and invalidated the Petitioner's
claim, mainly on the ground that, her father's claim towards the ‘Thakar’
Scheduled Tribe was invalidated. This Court set aside the show cause
notices issued by the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee to some of
the validity holders and the impugned order was thus unsustainable and
be set aside. He placed on record the copies of the orders by this Court
in various writ petitions in support of prayers made in the petition.
4. It is submitted by the learned AGP that, the claim of the
Petitioner's father towards the ‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe was invalidated
by the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee, and therefore, the
impugned order is just and proper and requires no interference.
5. The papers annexed to the petition goes to show that the
Petitioner's father iled the aidavit in the prescribed format and
provided the genealogy. The said genealogy of the Petitioner from the
parental side is not disputed by the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny
Committee. The genealogy is reproduced below:
Gaikwad RD 3 of 8
904-WP-4079-2026-J.doc
6. There is no dispute that the Petitioner's father by name Rajesh
Ramesh Gaikwad sufered the order of invalidation by the Respondent
No.2-Scrutiny Committee towards the ‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe. He
challenged the said invalidation before this Court vide Writ Petition No.
9237 of 2016, which came to be decided by order dated 2 nd July 2019.
Gaikwad RD 4 of 8
904-WP-4079-2026-J.doc
The copy of the said order goes to show that, the Respondent No.2-
Scrutiny Committee invalidated the Petitioner's father's tribe claim on
the ground of suppression of fact of earlier invalidation of his tribe
claim and withdrawal of the petition, challenging the earlier invalidation
and fraud. The observation in the said order goes to show that, this
Court observed that, the Petitioner, while his writ petition challenging
invalidation of his earlier caste certiicate was pending in this Court,
approached the authority and obtained a new caste certiicate,
surreptitiously withdrew the petition and obtained a new validity
certiicate. The said order goes to show that, the Petitioner's father's
tribe claim was not examined and adjudicated on merits by this Court.
The petition was dismissed solely on the ground of suppression of facts
and fraud.
7. The copy of the aidavit submitted by Petitioner's father to the
Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee in the matters of the Petitioner's
tribe claim goes to show that, the details of the validity holders in their
blood relations, including the number of writ petitions and the date of
decisions were provided in the aidavit. The Petitioner has placed on
record the copies of the orders passed by this Court in various writ
petitions iled by the paternal blood relatives of the Petitioner shown in
the above genealogy. As many as 17 paternal side relatives of the
Petitioner are issued the validity certiicates pursuant to orders of this
Gaikwad RD 5 of 8
904-WP-4079-2026-J.doc
Court. Perusal of the orders passed in the writ petitions by some of the
relatives named in the above genealogy goes to show that, this Court
considered the contra entries found in the records of the ancestors of
the Petitioner. Thus, the contention of contra entries considered by
Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee in the impugned order becomes
inconsequential. The order dated 4 th December 2023 passed in Writ
Petition No.3463 of 2023 (Shrikant s/o. Mahadeo Gaikwad vs. State of
Maharashtra and others) and 11 other connected writ petitions goes to
show that, the order dated 2nd March 2023 cancelling the validity
certiicates by the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee in respect of
the parental blood relatives of the Petitioner, as shown in the above
genealogy, was set aside. The observation in the said order shows that,
this Court noted that, the Committee sought to review its order granting
validity, by referring to certain old entries that were not noticed earlier
while granting validity certiicates, did not ind favour with this Court, as
the very same documents were the subject matter of consideration in the
case of Snehal Dilip Gaikwad v. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certiicate
Veriication Commitee, Pune & Ors. in Writ Petition No. 8152 of 2019 and
this Court noted that in view of the adjudication, wherein the same
material that was considered while granting validity, were revisited.
Therefore, there was no reason to recall the validity certiicates issued to
the Petitioners therein.
Gaikwad RD 6 of 8
904-WP-4079-2026-J.doc
8. Though it is mentioned in the impugned order that pursuant to
the order dated 6th of December 2024 in Writ Petition No. 7262 of 2022
iled by Rupesh Gaikwad, whereby this Court set aside the show cause
notice, the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee was considering
approaching the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, it was submitted by
the learned AGP, on instructions, that no Special Leave Petition (SLP)
was iled by Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee against the said
order. It is, thus, clear that, several blood relatives of the Petitioner
from the parental side are issued the validity certiicates towards the
‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe pursuant to the decisions of this Court. As the
invalidation of the tribe claim of the Petitioner's father was on the
ground of fraud and misrepresentation and this Court dismissed the
petition on the said ground, the same will not be an impediment for the
Petitioner in challenging the invalidation of her tribe claim. The position
under the law is well settled that if the blood relatives hold the validity
of a particular caste or tribe duly issued, the other blood relatives from
the paternal side cannot be denied the validity for the same caste or
tribe.
9. In the backdrop of the undisputed aspects of the matter that,
several blood relatives of the Petitioner from the paternal side are
holding the validities towards the ‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe pursuant to
orders of this Court, the impugned order is liable to be set aside, as the
Gaikwad RD 7 of 8
904-WP-4079-2026-J.doc
same is based on the reasons of contra entries and invalidations to
some of the ancestors from the paternal side which fell for
consideration of this Court in the writ petitions iled earlier by the blood
relatives of the Petitioner and are allowed.
10. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
i) The Writ Petition is allowed.
ii) The order dated 24th July 2026 passed by Respondent No. 2
Scrutiny Committee invalidating the Petitioner's claim towards
the ‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe is quashed and set aside.
iii) The Respondent No.2-Committee is directed to issue the
validity certiicate to the Petitioner as belonging to the
‘Thakar’ Scheduled Tribe within a period of two (2) weeks from
today.
iv) The Writ Petition stands disposed of.
[Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]
Digitally
signed by
RAJU
RAJU DATTATRAYA
DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD Date:
2026.09.22
19:30:18
+0530
Gaikwad RD 8 of 8
Checking your session…