A Caste Scrutiny Committee must consider all relevant evidence, including ancestral records and vigilance reports, and provide specific findings on each document to ensure a reasoned and fair determination of caste status.

ORAL ORDER

1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner impugns the judgment and order dated 30.05.2025 passed by the respondent No.2 – Caste Scrutiny Committee whereby the Caste Certificate of the petitioner has been cancelled.

2. Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has placed relevant documents on record which have also been verified by the Vigilance Cell and the report was also submitted to the respondent No.2 – Caste Scrutiny Committee. He submits that thereafter the Forest Department has also submitted its report to the respondent No.2 – Caste Scrutiny Committee. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner has also placed on record the Vigat Darshak Card as well as Maswadi receipt issued to the great grand-father of the petitioner. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the respondent No.2 – Caste Scrutiny Committee has not taken into consideration all the documents as produced by the petitioner in support of Caste Certificate and has proceeded to hold that since the father of the petitioner was a permanent resident of Mangrol city as on 19.10.1956, therefore, the petitioner cannot be said to belong to Scheduled Tribe. He submits that the respondent No.2 – Caste Scrutiny Committee has ignored the findings of the Vigilance Cell while arriving at such a conclusion. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the Maswadi receipt as well as Pedinama issued to the petitioner by the competent authority have been totally ignored while coming to such a finding. He submits that in the present case, the Caste Scrutiny Committee has also not doubted the genuineness of the Caste Certificate so issued to the petitioner by the competent authority. He submits that the failure to take into account all the documents in support of the caste claim as well as failure to consider the vigilance report in its correct perspective vitiates the impugned order. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the respondent No.2 – Caste Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration on merits.

3. Mr. Mayank Chavda, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that the respondent No.2 – Caste Scrutiny Committee has detailed out all the documents presented before it in the impugned order. He submits that each of the document verified by the Vigilance Cell as well as report submitted by the Range Forest Officer have also been considered in the impugned order. He submits that the documents enumerated in the impugned order were the documents which have been relied upon by the petitioner at the time of hearing. The petitioner was also granted hearing on many dates and after giving full opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the respondent No.2 – Caste Scrutiny Committee has come to the conclusion that the documents so produced by the petitioner only show that on the date of Presidential Notification, the father of the petitioner was a resident of the Mangrol city and therefore, it has been held that the petitioner cannot be granted status of Scheduled Tribe. He submits that no infirmity can be attached to the findings rendered by the respondent No.2 – Caste Scrutiny Committee. The impugned order passed is a reasoned order and in accordance with law. He, therefore, submits that the present Special Civil Application be dismissed.

4. Heard learned counsels for the parties, perused the documents on record and considere