Compliance with mandatory requirements for altering entries in the General School Register, as per S.S. Code 26.3 and 26.4, is crucial for validating caste claims.

JUDGMENT

G.A.SANAP,J.

1. The petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 9/8/2000 passed by the respondent No. 2- the Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur whereby the Committee invalidated the Caste Certificate of the petitioner belonging to 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she took primary education in Girls' School, Maskasath, Nagpur. She took her further school education from New English High School, Nagpur. In the school record, the caste of the petitioner is recorded as 'Halba'. On the basis of the copy of the School Leaving Certificate the Executive Magistrate, Nagpur had granted the Caste Certificate of 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe to the petitioner. The petitioner applied for the employment in Irrigation Department of the State of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai against the seat reserved for Scheduled Tribe category. On selection the petitioner joined the post on 3/9/1998.

3. The father of the petitioner took education in New English High School, Nagpur between 25/4/1952 and 31/3/1958. In the school record of father, his caste was recorded as 'Halba'. On the basis of the School Leaving Certificate Sub Divisional Officer, Nagpur had granted the Certificate of 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe to the father of the petitioner. Her father was also appointed as 'Clerk' in Central Railway at Chandrapur with effect from 8/3/1963 on the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe. Her father took voluntary retirement with effect from 31/3/1999. The petitioner has relied upon the certificate of 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe issued in favour of her father to substantiate her claim.

4. The Caste Certificate of the petitioner, on her appointment, was sent for verification to the respondent No. 2 - Committee, by respondent No. 1. In the inquiry conducted by the respondent No. 2, the petitioner was granted an opportunity to present her case. The Police Vigilance Cell's report was served upon her. She filed her reply to the said report. The petitioner pointed out that her father belongs to 'Halba' caste and the said caste was recorded in his school record by scoring out the incorrect caste namely 'Koshti'. The respondent No. 2 vide order dtd. 9/8/2000 invalidated the 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe claim of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, this decision of the Caste Scrutiny Committee is not sustainable in view of the concrete evidence placed before Committee by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the inquiry conducted by the Caste Scrutiny Committee was not according to law. The petitioner on these averments prayed for setting aside the order of the Caste Scrutiny Committee and declaration of her caste being 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe.

5. The Research Officer filed the reply on behalf of the respondent No. 2. He has denied the facts stated in the petition. The Research Officer supported the order, passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, invalidating the 'Halba' Scheduled Tribe claim of the petitioner. It is contended that the Caste Certificate obtained by the petitioner was on the basis of the school record of her father. The school record of her father was found insufficient and not reliable to accept the claim of the petitioner. The Caste Scrutiny Committee during the course of inquiry received the Police Vigilance Cell's report. The Police Vigilance Cell's report pointed out that in the school record of the father of the petitioner, the entry of caste 'Koshti' was scored and in its place 'Halba' was inserted on the strength of the affidavit. According to the respondent, this change of the caste in the school record was not permissible. The required procedure was not followed. There was no other evidence to substantiate the tribe claim of the petitioner. The tribe claim of the petitioner was rejected by recording cogent reasons. The petitioner was not entitled to get the benefit of the reservation on the basis of the Caste Certificate.

6. We have heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned Assi