The importance of pre-independence documents in establishing caste claims and the affirmation that the affinity test is not a sole criterion for rejecting a claim.

JUDGMENT

Shrikant D. Kulkarni, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for both the sides, heard finally at admission stage.

2. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned order passed by respondent No.3 / Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar Division, Nandurbar (hereinafter referred to as the "committee") thereby invalidating caste claim of the petitioner as "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe, the petitioner has approached this Court by invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

3. The petitioner is studying in junior college. The Principal of the college referred the tribe claim of the petitioner to respondent No.3 / committee for verification of tribe certificate. The petitioner has produced sufficient evidence in the form of school record and birth record of grandparents including documents prior to pre-constitutional era. The vigilance was conducted. The petitioner has filed his say in response to the show cause notice issued by the committee. The petitioner is now exploring possibility to take admission in professional course. The tribe claim of the petitioner came to be invalidated by the impugned order.

4. Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has produced old record right from the year 1928 in order to establish that his family belongs to "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe. The genealogy is not disputed. The committee has discarded the old record and that too of the pre-independence era without assigning the reasons. Pandharinath Hari Patil happens to be grandfather of the petitioner and his school record dated 23.03.1928 speaks entry "Thakur: in the caste column. According to Mr. Deshmukh, the committee has discarded the old document by simply relying upon one entry of the petitioner's aunt wherein her caste is recorded as "Hindu Thakur" Ojtt. OBC). He submitted that the findings recorded by the committee are erroneous. There is no contra entries to take doubt about the caste claim of the petitioner. The area restriction is removed even then the committee has considered that aspect and turn down the tribe claim of the petitioner. He submitted that the affinity test is not a litmus test. To support his argument, Mr. Deshmukh has placed on record the decision of Apex Court in case of Anand Vs. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe claim and ors. reported in (2012)1 SCC113. He submitted that the committee has unnecessarily referred the record of other persons from Chalisgaon Taluka. The petitioner has no relation with them. He submitted that the impugned order passed by the committee is bad in law and liable to be quashed and set aside.

5. Mr. Lokhande, learned A.G.P. for State / respondent Nos. 1 and 3 submitted that the committee has taken into consideration old documents produced by the petitioner. The committee after examining all the documentary evidence, vigilance report and report of the Research officer arrived at the conclusion that the petitioner has failed to prove her tribe claim as "Thakur" Scheduled Tribe. The findings recorded by the committee are well reasoned. Those are supported by various decisions of the Bombay High Court, which are referred by the committee. The decision rendered by the committee is not defective in the eye of law. The school record of the petitioner's aunt namely Akkabai Pandharinath Patil records her casts as "Hindu Tahkur Ojtt. OBC) and the same is against the claim of the petitioner. He further invited our attention to the entry of school record of Narayan Pandharinath Thakur who happens to be uncle of the petitioner, wherein his caste is recorded as "Hindu Marathe Thakur" and Marathe has been scored. According to learned AGP, it is not a fit case to interfere with the decision of the committee.

6. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.P.

7. On perusing the impugned order passed by the committee, it is found