1

1. WP 3254.21.doc

JPP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 3254 OF 2021

Kasturi Sushma Khandekar

… Petitioner

V/s.

State of Maharashtra and Ors.

... Respondents

Mr. Makrand Kale a/w. Mr. S.R. Ghanavat for the Petitioner

Mr. N.C. Walimbe, AGP for the Respondent - State

CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE &

G.A. SANAP, JJ.

DATE : 22 MARCH 2022

Oral Judgment (Per Sunil Shukre, J.) :-

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Taken up for

final disposal by consent of parties.

3.

The main issue involved in this Petition is about which

of the two social status, one that of the father and the other that of

the mother could be claimed by the Petitioner. The answer to the

question would depend upon the evidence regarding the manner in

which and by whom the Petitioner has been reared.

2

1. WP 3254.21.doc

4.

In the present case, on going through the vigilance report

and also the document relating to school entry, one can at once say

that the Petitioner has been almost entirely brought up by her

mother who belongs to Mahar Scheduled Caste. The mother and

the father of the Petitioner were married on 25 April 1993 but soon

after the marriage, discord struck the couple as a result of which, the

couple could never reconcile their differences. The inevitable

occurred in November 2009 when there was a consent decree of

divorce granted by the Competent Civil Court. The Petitioner

having been born in August 2002 was hardly seven years of age at

that time and was thereafter, raised by her mother as a single parent.

Even before the divorce, the record shows that the Petitioner was

looked after and taken care of in all respect by her mother. The

Vigilance Enquiry Officer, on making a detailed enquiry, found that

father of the Petitioner never cared for his two children and never

related to them in any manner nor did he take his children to any of

his paternal relative. The Vigilance Officer has found that the

children or the two siblings including the Petitioner do not recognize

any of the paternal relatives. He has also noted that while admitting

the Petitioner to the first standard of a school, her mother showed

the Petitioner as belonging to Mahar caste. He has further found

that the grandfather of the children follows customs, traditions and

practices prevailing in Mahar caste.

3

1. WP 3254.21.doc

5.

Thus, the evidence shows that for all purposes the

Petitioner has grown and has been reared in an atmosphere and with

customs, traditions and practices that prevail in a household

inhabited by Mahar caste persons, which is the caste of the mother

of the Petitioner from maternal side. This evidence would certainly

entitle the Petitioner to stake a claim as belonging to Mahar caste, as

per the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Rameshbhai

Dabhai Naika v/s. State of Gujarat and Ors. (2012) 3 SCC 400,

which is followed by this Court in many of its judgments including

the one in the case of Anchal d/o. Bharati Badwaik v/s. District Caste

Scrutiny Committee and Ors. (WP No.4905 of 2018, decided on 8

April 2019). However, while invalidating the caste certificate of the

Petitioner, the Scrutiny Committee erroneously held that the

Petitioner ought to have submitted evidence from the side of her

father in order to prove her claim. In the face of evidence

overwhelmingly favouring the case of the Petitioner showing that

she is entitled to claim the social status of her mother, the Scrutiny

Committee took quite a contrary view ignoring the law declared by

the Supreme Court in the case of Rameshbhai Naika (supra).

6.

Further perusal of the impugned order also shows that

the Scrutiny Committee has failed to properly appreciate the

evidence brought on record by the Petitioner, which was in the

nature of entries of relatives o