The School Leaving Certificate is a valid document for determining caste, and affidavits of individuals who were previously held to belong to a particular tribe and who claim to be related to the petitioner cannot be ignored.

Headnote:
CASTE CERTIFICATE - VALIDITY - CIRCULAR - INTERPRETATION - SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE - EVIDENCE - RELATIONSHIP - AFFIDAVIT - SCHEDULE CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES ORDERS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1976 - CONSTITUTION (SCHEDULED TRIBES) ORDER, 1950.
Fact of the Case:

Petitioner, a medical student, was issued a caste certificate in 1982 certifying him as belonging to the Halba Scheduled Tribe. The Director of Social Welfare and Divisional Commissioner invalidated the certificate, finding that the petitioner did not belong to the Halba Tribe. The petitioner challenged the orders.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the circular issued by the Social Welfare Department in 1981, which directed that the School Leaving Certificate should be accepted as valid for the purpose of caste, was binding on the respondents. The court also found that the petitioner's School Leaving Certificate, which mentioned his caste as Halba, was genuine and backed by other documents. The court further held that the affidavits of two individuals who were previously held to belong to the Halba Tribe and who claimed to be related to the petitioner could not be ignored.
Issues: 1. Whether the circular issued by the Social Welfare Department in 1981, which directed that the School Leaving Certificate should be accepted as valid for the purpose of caste, was binding on the respondents. 2. Whether the petitioner's School Leaving Certificate, which mentioned his caste as Halba, was genuine and backed by other documents. 3. Whether the affidavits of two individuals who were previously held to belong to the Halba Tribe and who claimed to be related to the petitioner could be ignored.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the circular issued by the Social Welfare Department in 1981 was binding on the respondents because it was issued with reference to a particular Tribe only and was not superseded by subsequent circulars. 2. The court found that the petitioner's School Leaving Certificate, which mentioned his caste as Halba, was genuine and backed by other documents, such as his Primary School Leaving Certificate and birth certificate. 3. The court held that the affidavits of two individuals who were previously held to belong to the Halba Tribe and who claimed to be related to the petitioner could not be ignored, as they provided evidence of the petitioner's relationship to members of the Halba Tribe.
Final Decision: The court set aside the orders passed by the respondents invalidating the petitioner's caste certificate and held the certificate to be valid.

JUDGMENT - Mohta, J. - The petitioner Abhay Shrawanji Parate, resident of Umrer in district Nagpur was given a caste certificate dated 22nd June 1982 by the Executive Magistrate, Umrer, certifying that he belongs to a Scheduled Tribe “Halba” as mentioned in the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976. The present petition is directed against the orders of the Director of the Social Welare and Divisional Commissioner invalidating the said certificate.

2. Undisputed position is that the birth certificate of the petitioner dated 2nd June 1964, his Primary School Leaving Certificate, the Secondary School Leaving Certificate and the 12th standard Junior College Leaving Certificate of the year 1982 describe him as Halba. On the basis of the caste certificate issued by the Executive Magistrate, the petitioner was provisionally admitted in the Government Medical College, Nagpur, in the First year M. B. B. S. course. As per the practice, the matter was referred to the Director of Social Welfare Department, Pune (respondent No. 3) for verification of his caste. After making some enquiry, respondent No. 3 came to the conclusion that the petitioner was not Halba and invalidated the certificate. Being aggrieved by the said decision, an appeal was preferred under Rule 3 (10) of the Rules for Admission (1982-83) for Medical Colleges of Government of Maharashtra framed under Government Resolution No. CBS-1680-53396/499-DB dated 9th October, 1981, befor the Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur (respondent No. 2). The respondent No. 2 also held some additional enquiry in which statement of the father of the petitioner was recorded and certain judgments of different High Courts were considered. The decision given by respondent No. 3 was confirmed.

3 We may, in the first place, shortly notice the substance of the reasoning adopted by repondent No. 3 -

(i) Surname 'Parate' is not found in Halba Tribe.

(ii) Weaving occupation was not followed by Halba Tribe.

(iii) This Tribe was not found in Nagpur district,

(iv) Social Workers and Institution referred to by petitioner merely represented 'Halba Koshti' and not 'Halba Tribe'.

The Divisional Commissioner recorded following additional reasons:

(i) The School Leaving Certificate ot the father of the petitioner who is a M. B. B. S. doctor records his caste as “Koshti” and not as “Halba”.

(ii) No effort to correct this certificate was ever made by him and his explanation that Koshti (weaver) represents the profession and not the caste, is not correct.

(iii) The family showed their caste as “Halba” for the first time in 1964.

(iv) Following the traditional profession of a particular caste does not make a person belonging to that caste.

(v) No relationship between the petitioner and those who were held to belonging to “Halba” Tribe by certain judgments of Courts have been established.

It is a common ground that before its amendment by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976, the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 (Part VII-A-Maharashtra-item 5, entry 13) issued by the President of India under Article 342 of the Constitution, only 'Halba-Halbi' from Garhchiroli and Sironcha talukas of Chandrapur district, Melghat Taluka of Arnravati district and Yeotmal, Kelapur and Wani Talukas of Yeotmal district were specified as Scheduled Tribes. It is by the Act of 1976 that area restriction was removed.

4. Now, the father of the petitioner has made a statement before the Divisional Commissioner that in the year 1964 there was no motive for entering a false caste in the birth register of the petitioner as then the family was not entitled to any benefit of this caste in view of the area restriction. According to him, Koshti was their profession and not the caste and it was this profession which was mentioned in the School Leaving Certificate as his caste. Further he had a meritorious career as a result of which neither necessity nor occasion arose for claiming any benefi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document