Caste claims must be evaluated with pre-constitutional documents holding greater evidential value, and reliance on affinity tests, which do not definitively establish caste ties, is insufficient for invalidation.

JUDGMENT :

RAJ D. WAKODE, J.

Heard Shri Ashwin Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri A. V. Palshikar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No1.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. The petitioner seeks challenge to the impugned order dated 06/03/2024 passed by the respondent No.1-Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Committee’ for the sake of brevity) thereby invalidating the caste-claim of the petitioner towards ‘Halbi’ Scheduled Tribe.

4. The brief facts which are undisputed leading to the present petition are as follows.

The petitioner claims to be belonging to Tribe ‘Halbi’ which is recognised as Scheduled Tribe in the State of Maharashtra and is included at Sr.No.19 in the Constitutional Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950. The petitioner in order to substantiate her claim has placed on record caste certificate dated 11/07/2019 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Achalpur in Form-C (record page 77, Annexure-2).

5. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Officer in Grade-‘B’ (Direct Recruit) by the employer respondent No.2-General Manager, Reserve Bank of India. The aforesaid fact is substantiated by the order of appointment dated 08/12/2020 placed on record by the petitioner at record page 115 (Annexure-4). Thus, the petitioner is in need of the validity certificate for the purpose of service. Since the petitioner was appointed on the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe category, respondent No.2- employer forwarded caste-claim of the petitioner for verification to the respondent No.1-Committee vide communication dated 01/09/2022.

6. The petitioner submitted various documents in support of her tribe-claim out of which two documents were pre-constitutional pertaining to her grandfather and cousin grandfather wherein the caste is recorded as ‘Halbi’ in the year 1932 and 1925 respectively. The petitioner has also relied upon the caste validity certificate issued to her paternal cousin brothers.

The respondent No.1-Committee forwarded the caste-claim of the petitioner to the police vigilance cell for enquiry. The police vigilance cell conducted home, school and revenue enquiry and submitted vigilance report on 28/08/2023. The police vigilance cell procured one pre-constitutional document pertaining to Bulki wife of Vailaji i.e. great great grandmother of the petitioner wherein her caste is recorded as ‘Koshti’ on 29/05/1929. The police vigilance cell also opined that the petitioner has failed to prove her affinity towards ‘Halbi’ Scheduled Tribe. Since the vigilance cell report was adverse to the claim of the petitioner, the respondent No.1 issued a show cause notice on 28/08/2023 to the petitioner. In response to the aforesaid show cause notice, the petitioner submitted detail explanation on 20/09/2023. The respondent No.1-Committee issued notice to the petitioner to remain present for hearing on 13/09/2023.

7. The respondent no.1-Committee after considering the reply submitted by the petitioner and relying on the vigilance cell report, invalidated the caste-claim of the petitioner vide order dated 06/03/2024 which is impugned in the present writ petition.

8. Shri Ashwin Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has substantiated her tribe-claim towards ‘Halbi’ Scheduled Tribe by placing on record caste validity certificates issued to her paternal cousin brothers viz. Milindkumar Ukardaji Hedaoo and Pradip Ukardaji Hedaoo who were granted va