Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Mangesh S. Patil, Prafulla S. Khubalkar
Suresh s/o Supadu Salunke – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Home Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. Learned A.G.P. waives service for all the respondents.
2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is taking exception to the judgment and order dated 24/04/2023, passed by respondent No.3/Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Dhule (for short ‘the committee’), in a proceeding under Section 7 of 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 ‘the 2000 Act’). By this judgment and order the committee has refused to validate and instead, ordered confiscation and cancellation of the petitioner’s ‘Thakur’ Scheduled Tribe certificate, alongwith initiation of action under Sections 10 and 11 of the 2000 Act.
3. On being appointed as Police Constable from the Scheduled Tribe category on 01/03/1988, the tribe claim of thepetitioner, was forwarded by respondent No.4/Superintendent of Police, Mumbai to the scrutiny committee by letter
The court emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the claimant to establish tribal status, and reliance on the affinity test is not conclusive in validating caste claims.
The court emphasized that the burden of proof for tribal status lies with the claimant, and reliance on irrelevant documents and misapplication of the affinity test can lead to arbitrary decisions.
The old documentary evidence from the pre-independence era holds probative value and should be relied upon to establish tribe claim. The affinity test is not a sole criteria for establishing the link....
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the respondent erred in ignoring valid documents and misinterpreting the law, ultimately leading to the setting aside of the order and the dir....
Caste validation must prioritize historical documentary evidence over outdated affinity tests, reaffirming established rights of recognized tribes.
The importance of older documents in establishing caste claim and the need to consider the broad perspective of caste claim genuineness.
The probative value of pre-independence documents, the importance of caste validity certificates, and the limitations of the affinity test influenced the court's decision.
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
