2026:BHC-AS:1086-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 15530 of 2023 Parth Sandeep Gawali and anr. … Petitioners V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and anr. … Respondents. Mr. R.K. Mendadkar, Advocate a/w. Siddhant Sawai, Prajakta Pashte for the Petitioners.

Mrs. P.J.Gavhane, AGP for the Respondents-State.

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK &

S.M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 8th January 2026.

P.C. :

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners.

LATA SUNIL PANJWANI D LA ig T i A ta l S ly U s N ig IL ned by 2. The Petitioners’ caste claim as belonging to Koli Mahadev PANJWANI Date: 2026.01.12 18:39:38 +0530 Scheduled Tribe is invalidated by the impugned order dated 21^st October 2022 passed by Respondent No.2 – Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee. The caste claim is invalidated on the ground that there has been material suppression of facts on behalf of the Petitioners while making the claim for grant of caste validity certificate. The learned counsel for the Petitioners relied upon the caste validity certificate issued by the Petitioners’ father as belonging to Hindu Mahadev Scheduled Tribe which is at page-81 of the paper-book and also caste validity certificates issued to the close blood relatives of the Petitioner in support of his case.

3. The learned AGP, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the petition. It is submitted that there is material suppression on behalf of the Petitioners and, therefore, for the reasons mentioned in the impugned order, the caste claim has been rejected. Moreover, it is submitted that the reliance placed by the Petitioners on the caste validity certificates of his close blood relatives is hardly of any consequence as the Committee has issued show-cause notices to the close blood relatives on various grounds including that the same has been obtained by suppression of material facts.

4. We have perused the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti v/s. State of Maharashtra¹. Para-24 of the decision reads thus:

“24. We can also contemplate one more scenario which is found in many cases. These are the cases where the applicant relies upon caste validity certificates issued to his blood relatives. Obviously, such a validity certificate has to be issued either by the Scrutiny Committee constituted in terms of the directions issued in Madhuri Patil case or constituted under the Rules framed under the 2000 Act. In such a case, firstly, the Scrutiny Committee must ascertain whether the certificate is genuine. Secondly, the Scrutiny Committee will have to decide whether the applicant has established that the

1 (2023) 16 SCC 415 person to whom the validity certificate relied upon by him ha been issued is his blood relative. For that purpose, the applicant must establish his precise and exact relationship with the person to whom the validity certificate has been granted. Moreover, an enquiry will have to be made by the Scrutiny Committee whether the validity certificate has been granted to the blood relative of the applicant by the Scrutiny Committee concerned after holding due enquiry and following due procedure.”

5. We have also perused the decision of this Court in the case of Apoorva d/o. Vinay Nichale v/s. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No.1 and others². Para-4 reads as under:

“4. We have considered the matter and we are of the view that the petitioner’s caste claim that she belongs to Kanjar Bhat-Nomadic Tribe ought to have been accepted by the Committee merely on the basis that identical caste claim of her sister that she belongs to Kanjar Bhat has been allowed by the Committee, even apart from the Government Resolution. We are of the opinion that the guidelines provided by the said Govt. Resolution are sound and based on sound principles. It would indeed be chaotic otherwise. If the relationship by blood is established or not doubted, and one such relative has been confirmed as belonging to a particular caste, the