Bombay High Court

GANPAT KACHRUBA SAKHARWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SANDIPKUMAR C MORE ABASAHEB D SHINDE

Holding

The High Court quashed the Scrutiny Committee’s order and directed issuance of validity certificates to the petitioners as members of the Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe.

Summary

The petitioners, a niece and her uncle, challenged a March 19, 2025 order of the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Verification Committee that invalidated their claim to belong to the Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe. They relied on genealogical records and the earlier judgment in Writ Petition No.11596 of 2023, which had granted conditional validity to distant relatives of the same tribe. The State argued that documentary contradictions showed the petitioners belonged to the Manner caste, not the Mannervarlu tribe, and that they failed to prove the required relationship. The Court examined the genealogical evidence, the 1954 and 1956 documents establishing tribal affiliation, and noted that the relationship to the earlier validity holder was undisputed. Consequently, the Court quashed the Scrutiny Committee’s order and directed the issuance of validity certificates to the petitioners, making the validity co‑terminous with that of their blood relatives. The writ petitions were therefore allowed.

Issues considered

Whether the Scrutiny Committee correctly invalidated the petitioners' claim to belong to the Mannervarlu Scheduled Tribe.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to conditional validity certificates based on their relationship to prior validity holders.
Whether the impugned order should be quashed and validity certificates issued to the petitioners.

Subjects

Scheduled Tribe
Validity Certificate
Scrutiny Committee
Genealogical Evidence
Conditional Validity
Maharashtra
High Court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:3667-DB
                                                (1)
                                                          966 WP-4275.2025 + 1.odt
                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            966 WRIT PETITION NO. 4275 OF 2025

                Vishakha d/o Dattarao Sakharwad
                Age : 31 yrs, occ : service
                R/o At Post Nandkheda,
                District Parbhani                                 Petitioner

                            Versus

                1.     The State of Maharashtra

                2.     Commissioner of State Tax
                       Goods and Services Tax Dept.,
                       Maharashtra State, Mumbai

                3.     Assistant Charity Commissioner
                       of State Tax, Goods and Services
                       Tax Department, Parbhani

                4.     Scheduled Tribe Certificate
                       Verification Committee,
                       Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar                  Respondents

                                          WITH
                            WRIT PETITION NO. 4338 OF 20 2025

                Ganpat s/o Kachruba Sakharwad
                Age : 55 yrs, occ : service
                R/o At Post Nandkheda,
                Taluka and District Parbhani                      Petitioner

                            Versus

                1.     The State of Maharashtra

                2.     Deputy Director,
                       Vocational Education and
                       Training, Regional Office,
                       Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar

                3.     Industrial Training Institute
                       Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli
                                (2)
                                             966 WP-4275.2025 + 1.odt
4.     Scheduled Tribe Certificate
       Verification Committee,
       Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar                     Respondents

                                 …
     Mr. O.D. Totawad, Advocate holding for Mr. Chandrakant
               Thorat, Advocate for the petitioners.
           Mr. N.B. Patil, A.G.P. for respondents-State.
                                 ...

                 CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND
                         ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.

                 DATED : 23 JANUARY 2026.

Oral Judgment (Per Abasaheb D. Shinde, J.) :

1.     Heard.

2.     Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With consent

of the rival parties, writ petitions are taken up for final hearing

at the stage of admission.

3.     By these writ petitions, the petitioners, who are niece

and uncle respectively, are challenging the common judgment

and order dated 19.03.2025 passed by respondent / Scrutiny

Committee by which tribe claims of the petitioners of belonging

to “Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe, have been invalidated.

4.     Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

distant blood relatives namely Siddhant Sakharwad and

Samarth Sakharwad of the petitioners, whose tribe claims

were invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee, have challenged

the said order before this Court by filing Writ Petition

No.11596 of 2023 and this Court has allowed the said petition
                                (3)
                                               966 WP-4275.2025 + 1.odt
partly by granting conditional validities to those petitioners

subject to proposed reopening of the validities on the basis of

which   those   petitioners   have      been   granted   conditional

validities. He also submits that the genealogy filed before the

Scrutiny Committee depicts the relationship of the petitioners

with those validity holders and there is no dispute about the

relationship. He, therefore, urged that the petitioners deserve

to be granted conditional validities.

5.   Per contra, learned A.G.P. submits that the Scrutiny

Committee, after considering the fact that there are certain

contra entries showing that the petitioners do not belong to

“Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe as the old documents pertains

to “Manner” caste, has invalidated the tribe claim of the

petitioners. He, therefore, submits that since the petitioners

have failed to establish their relationship with the validity

holders as well as to substantiate that the petitioners belong to

“Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe, they are not entitled for

issuance of even conditional validities.

6.   After having considered rival submissions advanced by

learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned AGP, we

find that one Gangadhar Kishanrao Sakharwad is the original

validity holder whose validity has been relied upon by this

Court while granting conditional validities to the distant blood
                                 (4)
                                               966 WP-4275.2025 + 1.odt
relatives of the petitioners.   This Court has also considered

oldest documents of 1954 as well as 1956 of the forefathers

showing that the petitioners therein belonged to “Mannervarlu”

Scheduled Tribe. We therefore find that since relationship of

the petitioners with those validity holders in Writ Petition No.

11596 of 2023 is not in dispute, we follow the same course and

pass the following order.

                              ORDER

     (i)     The writ petitions are allowed.


     (ii)    The impugned order dated 19.03.2025 passed
             by respondent No.4/Scrutiny Committee is
             hereby quashed and set aside.


     (iii)   Respondent/Scrutiny Committee is directed to
             issue validity certificates to the petitioners of
             belonging to “Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe.


     (iv)    The validity granted in favour of the petitioners
             will be co-terminus with the validity certificates
             of the blood relatives of the petitioners, whose
             tribe claims are proposed to be reopened.




(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE)                   (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
     JUDGE                                     JUDGE




VD_Dhirde

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…