The importance of older documents in establishing caste claim and the need to consider the broad perspective of caste claim genuineness.

JUDGMENT

G.A. Sanai, J. - Rule.

2 Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally, by consent of the parties.

3 In this Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the order dated 8th December, 2020 passed by Respondent No.2-Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nashik Division, Nashik invalidating the caste certificate of the Petitioner as belonging to Thakur Scheduled Tribe.

4 It is the case of the Petitioner that she belongs to Thakur, Scheduled Tribe by birth. The Competent Authority issued a caste certificate of Thakur, Scheduled Tribe to her on 4th August, 2019. The Petitioner is a student. The Petitioner, therefore, applied to the Respondent No.2 on 23rd September, 2019 seeking verification of her caste certificate. The Petitioner was required to submit the validity certificate as a condition precedent for prosecuting studies under the reserved category i.e. scheduled tribe. The Petitioner submitted number of documents including two pre-constitution period documents and caste validity certificate issued to Sachin Nana Shinde, a real uncle. The Petitioner participated in the hearing of the proceeding conducted by the Respondent No.2. According to Petitioner, without considering the pre-constitution period documents and validity certificate Respondent No.2 rejected her tribe claim. No reasons have been recorded. It is stated that the Petitioner has been allotted a seat under a scheduled tribe category in the first round of M.K. S.S. Cummins College of Engineering for Women, Karve Nagar, Pune-Respondent No.4.

5 The validity certificate is required to be produced to prosecute her studies under the scheduled tribe quota. According to Petitioner, the order passed by the Respondent No.2 does not record reasons. The documentary evidence has not been properly considered. The rejection of tribe claim of the Petitioner is not according to law.

6 One Ambadas Lahanu Gaikwad, a Research Officer, attached to Respondent No.2 has filed the Affidavit on behalf of Respondent No.2 and opposed the claim. It is contended that the Scrutiny Committee has taken into consideration all the documents produced on record. In some of the pre-constitution period documents the caste of the relatives was shown as 'Hindu Thakur' or 'Hindu Maratha Thakur'. The entries were self contrary. No convincing evidence was placed on record. The Caste Scrutiny Committee during the course of enquiry found that the caste certificate of the uncle of the Petitioner got validated without proper material. The Committee, therefore, issued a show cause notice to the uncle of the Petitioner for invalidating the scheduled tribe claim. The Petitioner was granted an opportunity of hearing. The Vigilance Cell Report was submitted by the police. The report did not support the Petitioner. The material collected during the vigilance enquiry did not establish the cultural affinity of the Petitioner with the scheduled tribe community. The Committee has recorded the reasons.

7 We have heard the learned Advocate Shri.Mendadkar for the Petitioner and learned AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. We have perused the record and proceedings.

8 Learned Advocate Shri. Mendadkar submitted that the Petitioner had produced two pre-constitution period documents to substantiate her scheduled tribe claim. The Petitioner had also produced before the Committee the caste validity certificate of her uncle Sachin Nanasaheb Shinde. Learned Advocate Shri. Mendadkar submitted that since the pre-constitution documents and caste validity certificate of blood relatives of the Petitioner from her paternal side were produced, the Caste Scrutiny Committee ought to have allowed the claim of the Petitioner. Learned Advocate further submitted that the tribe claim has been supported by the documents. In the submission of the learned Advocate, the contrary entries of the blood relatives cannot be given precedence before the pre-constitution period entries of the blood relatives relied upon by the Petitioner.

9 Learned AGP su