( 1 )

wp6653.22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 6653 OF 2022

Sunil Chagan Baviskar

..

Petitioner

Age. 48 years, Occupation : Service,

R/o. Hated (BK.), Tq. Chopda,

Dist. Jalgaon.

Versus

1]

The State of Maharashtra

..

Respondents

Through its Secretary,

Social Justice and Special Assistance

Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 400032.

2]

The Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe,

De-notified, Nomadic Tribes,

Other Backward Classes and

Special Backward Category,

Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee,

Nandurbar, Tq. & Dist. Nandurbar.

3]

Nutan Dnyanmandir,

Adawad, Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon,

Through its Head Master.

Mr.Mohit S. Shah, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.S.G. Sangle, AGP for the respondent/State.

CORAM

:

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &

ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ.

DATED

:

30.06.2022

( 2 )

wp6653.22

O R D E R [PER : ANIL L. PANSARE,J.] :-

01.

Leave to amend prayer clause granted. The amendment be

carried out forthwith.

02.

Issue notice to respondent Nos.1 and 2. The learned AGP waives

service of notice for respondent Nos.1 & 2. We do not intend to issue notice to

respondent No.3, as the petition could be disposed off by issuing appropriate

directions to the respondent No.2.

03.

By way of amended prayer, the petitioner has questioned the

legality and correctness of the order dated 24.03.2022 passed by respondent

No.2-Scrutiny Committee, Nandurbar, whereby the caste certificate issued to

the petitioner is invalidated. The petitioner claims to be belonging to the

caste – Tokre-Koli. The petitioner has relied upon five validity certificates

granted to his five paternal relatives. The Committee ignored these five

certificates.

04.

The learned AGP has strongly supported the impugned order. He

( 3 )

wp6653.22

contends that the burden to prove validity is upon the petitioners. The

petitioners failed to prove that three out of five validity holders are his blood

relatives and that the other two validities were granted without conducting

detail enquiries.

05.

We have considered the rival submissions. We have gone through

the impugned order. Ku. Gitanjali, the cousin sister of the petitioner was

granted validity certificate in the year 2005 by the Scrutiny Committee at

Nashik. The Respondent No.2-Committee opined that the original record of

the case of Ku. Gitanjali was not received and therefore the document

submitted by the petitioner was found not sufficient to prove that Ku. Gitanjali

is blood relative of the petitioner. Similar is the reasoning for ignoring caste

validity issued in favour of Ku. Vandana – the another cousin sister of the

petitioner, so also for Mahesh – the cousin brother of the petitioner.

06.

The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that these

findings of the Committee in respect of three cousins that there are no

documents to show that they are blood relatives of the petitioner, are rendered

without examining the contents of the affidavit filed by the petitioner. He

( 4 )

wp6653.22

further submits that there is nothing in vigilance enquiry to indicate that these

cousins were not blood relatives of the petitioner.

07.

What we find is that even if these three validity certificates are

ignored, there were two other validity certificates granted in favour of the

blood relatives of the petitioner, pursuant to the order passed by the High

Court in Writ Petition Nos. 1703 of 1993 and 1917 of 1996. Validity

certificates were issued to one Pratap Waman Baviskar and Rasiklal Jagannath

Baviskar. Father of Rasiklal, namely, Jagannath is real uncle of the petitioner.

Surprisingly, the Committee has ignored these two validity certificates on the

ground that the then Caste Scrutiny Committee has issued certificates without

conducting detail enquiry. These findings are rendered despite the order

passed by the High Court at Aurangabad Bench, has attained finality.

08.

In the circumstances, if the impugned order of the Committee is

to be given effect to