Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.
Bhanudas S/o Hona Gajbhiv - Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, General Administration Department & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 4945 of 2013
Decided On : 02-08-2017
MAHAR CASTE - VALIDITY CERTIFICATE - SCRUTINY COMMITTEE - INVALIDATION - WRIT PETITION - RESTORATION OF VALIDITY CERTIFICATE: The petitioner, claiming to belong to 'Hindu Mahar Scheduled Caste', received a certificate to that effect from the Executive Magistrate. The authority to issue the caste certificate was later conferred on the Sub-Divisional Officer, who issued a caste certificate to the petitioner. A certificate of validity was issued by the Scrutiny Committee in 2007, validating the petitioner's claim. However, a complaint was made against the petitioner, leading to an impugned order by the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the petitioner's claim. The petitioner challenged this order in a Writ Petition. The Court observed that the Scrutiny Committee was obliged to verify the claim strictly in accordance with the Maharashtra Act No. XXIII of 2001. The Committee had before it the order passed by the Court, which obliged it to once again consider the claim. The Committee proceeded on the basis that the order of the Court binds it and it must verify the claim. The Committee took on record certain documents forwarded by the respondent, alleging that the petitioner's blood relatives are Christians by birth. The petitioner denied these allegations and asserted that the entries in the caste column of his blood relations are Hindu Mahar and he has not embraced Christian religion. The Court held that the Committee could not have arrived at the conclusion that the petitioner has embraced Christianity based solely on the entries in the caste column of some of his blood relations. There were equal number of documents in which the petitioner's blood relations have been certified as belonging to Hindu Mahar caste. The petitioner specifically denied the allegations of the respondent and asserted that the entries in the caste column of his blood relations are Hindu Mahar and he has not embraced Christian religion. The Committee heavily relied upon the observations and findings in a Criminal Case, where the petitioner was acquitted of the offence of Atrocity. The Court found that the trial Court's finding that the petitioner belongs to the Christian community was based on lack of knowledge of basic tenets. It is not that one can embrace a community or caste and lateron exit to another community or caste. Religion can be changed and one can embrace another religion, but caste or tribe cannot be changed. The Court held that the Committee's order was perverse and vitiated by non-application of mind. The Committee could not have discarded the documents produced by the petitioner, which established that the Church addressed the communication and stated that the petitioner was not baptized and was not a member of the Church. The Committee also erred in discarding the Zilla Parishad school record of the petitioner's relatives, which contained entries in the caste column as Hindu Mahar. The Court relied on judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Bombay High Court, which held that a person whose parents belonged to a Scheduled Caste before their conversion to Christianity can, on conversion or re-conversion to Hinduism, be regarded as a member of Scheduled Caste only if he is accepted as a member of that caste by other members of the caste. The Court also held that the Committee misdirected itself when it relied on the observations of the trial Court's judgment in the Sessions Case/Atrocity Case and the report of the Vigilance Cell, which concluded that the petitioner's father was burried and there was no cremation peculiar to Hindu religion. The Court allowed the Writ Petition and restored the Certificate of Validity issued to the petitioner on 24/04/2007 bearing no. 4270 validating his claim as 'Hindu Mahar Scheduled Caste'.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, claiming to belong to 'Hindu Mahar Scheduled Caste', received a certificate to that effect from the Executive Magistrate. The authority to issue the caste certificate was later conferred on the Sub-Divisional Officer, who issued a caste certificate to the petitioner. A certificate of validity was issued by the Scrutiny Committee in 2007, validating the petitioner's claim. However, a complaint was made against the petitioner, leading to an impugned order by the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the petitioner's claim. The petitioner challenged this order in a Writ Petition.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Committee's order was perverse and vitiated by non-application of mind. The Committee could not have discarded the documents produced by the petitioner, which established that the Church addressed the communication and stated that the petitioner was not baptized and was not a member of the Church. The Committee also erred in discarding the Zilla Parishad school record of the petitioner's relatives, which contained entries in the caste column as Hindu Mahar. The Court relied on judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Bombay High Court, which held that a person whose parents belonged to a Scheduled Caste before their conversion to Christianity can, on conversion or re-conversion to Hinduism, be regarded as a member of Scheduled Caste only if he is accepted as a member of that caste by other members of the caste. The Court also held that the Committee misdirected itself when it relied on the observations of the trial Court's judgment in the Sessions Case/Atrocity Case and the report of the Vigilance Cell, which concluded that the petitioner's father was burried and there was no cremation peculiar to Hindu religion.
Issues: Whether the Scrutiny Committee's order invalidating the petitioner's claim as belonging to 'Hindu Mahar Scheduled Caste' was valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the Scrutiny Committee's order was perverse and vitiated by non-application of mind. The Committee could not have discarded the documents produced by the petitioner, which established that the Church addressed the communication and stated that the petitioner was not baptized and was not a member of the Church. The Committee also erred in discarding the Zilla Parishad school record of the petitioner's relatives, which contained entries in the caste column as Hindu Mahar. The Court relied on judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Bombay High Court, which held that a person whose parents belonged to a Scheduled Caste before their conversion to Christianity can, on conversion or re-conversion to Hinduism, be regarded as a member of Scheduled Caste only if he is accepted as a member of that caste by other members of the caste. The Court also held that the Committee misdirected itself when it relied on the observations of the trial Court's judgment in the Sessions Case/Atrocity Case and the report of the Vigilance Cell, which concluded that the petitioner's father was burried and there was no cremation peculiar to Hindu religion.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the Writ Petition and restored the Certificate of Validity issued to the petitioner on 24/04/2007 bearing no. 4270 validating his claim as 'Hindu Mahar Scheduled Caste'.
1. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.
2. By this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Class and Special Backward Class Divisional Certificate Scrutiny Committee no.1, Nasik Division, Nasik.
3. This is the Committee functional under the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 (for short “Maharashtra Act No. XXIII of 2001”).
4. The first respondent is the State of Maharashtra. The second respondent is the Committee. The third respondent is the Tahsildar, Shevgaon, Tq. Shevgaon, District – Ahmednagar and respondent no.4 is the complainant.
5. He had made a complaint against the petitioner and which led to the impugned order.
6. The petitioner claims to be belonging to 'Hindu Mahar Scheduled Caste'. He received a certificate to that effect from the Executive Magistrate, Shevgaon. That was issued on 29/02/1988. A copy of this caste certificate is annexed to the Petition at Annexure 'A'.
7. Thereafter, the authority to issue the caste certificate, was conferred on the Sub-Divisional Officer. The petitioner, therefore, applied for issuance of a caste certificate to this competent authority, namely, Sub-Divisional Officer, Ahmednagar and he issued a caste certificate on 10/8/2005, copy of which is at Annexure 'B'.
8. A certificate of validity was issued by the second respondent Committee in the year 2007, validating the claim of the petitioner. A copy of this validity certificate is annexed to the Petition as Annexure 'C'.
9. It is the grievance of the petitioner that respondent no.4 had a personal grudge against him and both of them are involved in litigation. He instituted Writ Petition no. 3077 of 2012 challenging the certificate of validity issued in favour of the petitioner. It was alleged that the certificate was issued without a reasoned order. This Petition was disposed of by this Court on 24/09/2012. The second respondent-Committee was directed to hear both sides and pass a reasoned order afresh. A copy of this order of this Court in that Writ Petition is marked as Annexure 'D'.
10. The second respondent-Committee thereafter forwarded the claim papers to the Vigilance Cell. That Cell was directed to hold an Inquiry and submit the report. This Cell submitted its report on 29/10/2013. This Vigilance Cell report after being received by the Committee, it followed the settled procedure of serving a copy thereof on the petitioner and calling upon him to submit his reply in details to the contents of this report. A copy of the Vigilance Cell report is marked as Annexure 'E' and the copy of the petitioner's reply to the contents thereof/show cause notice, is marked as Annexure 'F'.
11. The petitioner relied upon several documents including a 'Hadola Vatan', issued in favour of his grandfather Mohana Balu Mahar. This is dated 31/03/1908. The petitioner also submitted the documents in respect of his uncle Eknath Mohana, whose caste was recorded in village register no. 14 as 'Mahar'. This document is dated 06/02/1917. Then the petitioner also submitted documents in respect of daughter of Mohana, wherein the entry in the caste column was recorded as 'Mahar'. The petitioner also submitted the documents, namely, a certificate in respect of his sister Indura Hona Mohana Mahar, wherein also the entry in the caste column is 'Mahar'. Several such documents and copies of which are compiled at Annexure 'G' collectively came to be forwarded. Respondent no.4 also gave a written reply and he relied on some documents to indicate that some of the relatives of the petitioner had embraced Christianity and extracts in respect of those relatives with en
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
