Back
1996(3) Supreme 126
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M. M. Punchhi and K. Venkataswami, JJ.
Gayatrilaxmi Bapurao Nagpure -Appellant
versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 4377 of 1996
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 16911 of 1995)
Decided on 15-3-1996
Held : That before the second respondent Committee, 17 documents were produced by the appellant to support the claim that she belonged to "Halba" Scheduled Tribe. The second-respondent Committee while appreciating the probative value of almost all the documents, did not refer to and consider an important document, namely, an order passed by the Government on appeal at the instance of Abinash Prabhakar Nagpure for identical relief. It is not disputed before us that Abinash Prabhakar Nagpure is the first cousin of the appellant. The Government by the said order dated 1.9.81 reversing the order of the Committee recognised the claim of Abinash Prabhakar Nagpure that he belonged to "Halba" Scheduled Tribe. (Para 10)
The second-respondent Committee ignored Sl. Nos. 1-4, 6, 8, 16 & 17, though they relate to school records of the appellant, her relatives wherein the appellant s caste is recorded as "Halba" by simply stating that "they were issued in a very casual manner without verifying the guidelines given by the Government from time to time to issue such certificates". Again while rejecting Sl. Nos. 5, 7, 10, 13 & 14, the Committee has commented that "there is no room for the presumption that the certificate has been correctly issued." We are not able to appreciate this approach of the Committee in rejecting the certificates in the absence of any attempt on the side of the Government to suspect the correctness/genuineness of the documents produced by the appellant. (Para 12)
Further Held : we are satisfied that the Committee failed to consider all the relevant materials placed before it and did not apply its mind to an important document "Sl. No. 9" which led the Committee ultimately record a finding against the appellant. By a wrongful denial of the caste certificate, the genuine candidate, he/she will be deprived of the privileges conferred upon him/her by the Constitution. Therefore greater care must be taken before granting or rejection any claim for caste certificate. (Para 16)
Undoubtedly, in cases of this type, the burden heavily lies on the applicant who seeks such a certificate. That does not mean that the authorities have no role to play in finding out the correctness or otherwise of the claim for issue of a caste certificate. We are of the view that the concerned authorities must also play a role in assisting the Committee to arrive at a correct decision. In this case, except the documents produced by the appellant, nothing has been produced by the concerned authorities to arrive at a different conclusion. (Para 17)
JUDGMENT
K. Venkataswami, J.-Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the Division Bench judgment of the Bombay High Court in W.P. No. 2773/95 dated 22.6.95.
3. At the time of arguments before us, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has confined his contention to the claim of the appellant that she belongs to "Halba" Secheduled Tribe.
4. Briefly stated the facts are that the appellant with a view to apply for admission to the Medical Course, approached the second respondent, the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee (for short "Committee") for the issue of a caste certificate to the effect that she belongs to "Halba" Scheduled Tribe to enable her to apply for admission to the Medical Course under that category. In support of her claim, apart from appearing before the Committee and furnishing certain information, the appellant has filed 17 documents consisting of certificates issued by Executive Magistrate and School Certificate issued to her and Caste Certificate issued to her father.
5. The second respondent Committee while considering the claim of the appellant and evaluating the probative value of the documents produced, did not appear to have dealt with one important document, namely, Certificate No. 9 in the Order of the second respondent which related to an Order passed by the Government on appeal by the first cousin of the appellant in the matter of issue of Caste Certificate to him. That Order of the Government dated 1.9.81 overruling the Order of a Committee, granted a Caste Certificate holding that the first cousin of the appllant, by name, Abinash Prabhakar Nagpure belonged to "Halba" community, a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Maharashtra. Likewise, while brushing aside the Caste Certificate issued in favour of the appellant s father, the Scrutiny Committee merely observed that it was issued in a casual manner without proper verification.
6. In the course of the argument before us, learned counsel for the appellant contended that in the light of the Instructions issued by the Government of Maharashtra s that if a close relative is already given a Caste Certificate, that must be given due weight, has not been followed by the Committee. He also submitted that the Certificate issued on 26.8.71 by the appropriate authority after verification was the basis for the issue of the Caste Certificate to the father of the appellant, was not noticed by the Committee. However, the Certificate dated 26.8.71 was not produced before the Committee. From the Order passed by the Committee, we find that the failure of the appellant to produce her father s Primary School Certificate was taken serious note of to reject the appellant s claim.
7. Before the High Court also, it is claimed, reliance was placed on the Caste Certificate issued to the first cousin and also the Death Certificate issued on the death of the appellant s grandmother but those were not discussed by the High Court.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents supporting the Order of the second respondent Committee submitted that in view of the judgments of this Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil and Anr. v. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development & Ors.1 ; Director of Tribal Welfare, Govt. of A.P. v. Laveti Giri & Anr.2, the conclusion recorded by the second respondent Committee does not call for any interference.
9. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the order of the second respondent Committee and also that of High Court.
10. We have noticed earlier that before the second respondent Committee, 17 documents were produced by the appellant to support the claim that she belonged to "Halba" Scheduled Tribe. The second-respondent Committee while appreciating the probative value of almost all the documents, did not refer to and consider an important ducument, namely, an order passed by the Government on appeal at the instance of Abinash Prabhakar Nagpure for identical relief. It is not disputed before us that Abinash Prabhakar Na
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
