Shri Murlidhar Kisan Mohol vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors

2026:BHC-AS:24937-DB
205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
Digitally
signed by
PRAJAKTA
SAGAR
VARTAK
Date:
2026.06.20
15:15:06
+0530
PRAJAKTA
SAGAR
VARTAK
Prajakta Vartak
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 4178 OF 2007
Shri Murlidhar Kisan Mohol )
age 33 years., Occ. Agriculture/business )
R/o. 123, Ram Baug Colony, )
Ram Kripa Apartment, Paud Road, )
Kothrud, Pune – 411 038. ) ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Maharashtra )
2. The Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee )
Office of Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Pune)
3. Nandakumar Gangadhar Gosavi )
Age adult, Occ. Business )
R/o. Mahananda Society, Flat No. 10, )
Plot No.22, Ram Baug Colony, )
Kothrud, Pune – 38. ) ...Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 4180 OF 2007
Shri Ankush Dagadu Tidke )
age 56 yrs., Occ. Business )
R/o. Shivneri Bungalow, Shikshak Nagar, )
Paud Road, Kothrud, Pune – 411 038. ) ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Maharashtra )
2. The Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee )
Office of Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Pune)
3. Bibhishan Madan Munde )
Age adult, Occ. Business )
R/o. 7/1/A+B, Thorat Colony, )
Karve Nagar, Pune – 52. )
4. Nitin Dattaram Chavan )
Age adult, Occ. Business )
Page 1 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
R/o. Runwal Meadows, Bldg. No.7, Flat No.4, )
Warje, Pune – 52. )

5. Dattatraya Uttareshwar Jadhwar )
Age adult, Occ. Business )
R/o. Indira Shankar Nagari, Bldg. V-18, )
Flat No. 17, Paud Road, Kothrud, )
Pune – 38. ) ...Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 4181 OF 2007
Shri Pruthviraj Shashikant Sutar )
age 33 yrs., Occ. Agriculture/business, )
R/o. Shivtirth, Shivtirth Nagar, Paud Road, )
Kothrud, Pune – 411 038. ) ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Maharashtra )
2. The Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee )
Office of Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Pune)
3. Bajirao Sakharam Masal )
Age adult, Occ.: Business, )
R/o. Shantidham Kunj Society, D-4, Flat No.31 )
Bhelke Nagar, Kothrud, Pune – 38. )
4. Shri Rahul Dattatray Magar )
Age adult, Occ.: Service, )
R/o. Plot No. 57/1, Kaushal, Gujrat Colony, )
Kothrud, Pune – 38. ) ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 2662 OF 2007
Vishnu Narayan Harihar )
Aged about 45 years, residing at 231, )
Mahatma Phule Peth, Dist. Pune ) ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. State of Maharashtra )
2. Regional Caste Scrutiny Committee )
Page 2 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
through its Member Secretary, Pune Division, )
Pune having its office at PMT Building, )
Behind Janaki Hall, Swargate, Pune-411 037. ) ...Respondents
_________

Mr. P. B. Shah with Mr. Avinash Avhad, Mr. Kayval Shah and Mr. Sandeep Patade
for the Petitioners in W.P. No. 4178 of 2007, W.P. No. 4180 of 2007 and W.P.
No.4181 of 2007.
None for the Petitioner in W.P. No. 2662 of 2007.
Ms. P. J. Gavhane, AGP for State in W.P. No. 4178 of 2007.
Mr. A. A. Alaspurkar, AGP for State in W.P. No. 4180 of 2007.
Mr. P. P. Kakade, Addl. G.P. with Ms. M. P. Thakur, AGP for State in W.P.
No.4181 of 2007.
Ms. Savita Prabhune, AGP for State in W.P. No. 2662 of 2007.
__________
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
AARTI SATHE, JJ.
DATE: 18 JUNE 2026.
Oral Judgment (Per G. S. Kulkarni):-
1. These are four petitions in which the prayers are similar, and the impugned
order is a common order.
2. The petitions (except Writ Petition No. 2662 of 2007) impugn the order
dated 22 May 2007 passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, Pune, whereby the
Caste Scrutiny Committee, on applications made by the private respondents,
purportedly exercised powers of review and set aside its earlier orders granting
caste validity certificates to the petitioners. Writ Petition No. 2662 of 2007
impugns a similar order dated 05 April 2007 passed by respondent no.2/Caste
Scrutiny Committee. Since the prayers in all the petitions are similar, for
convenience, it is appropriate to note the substantive prayers, which read thus:-
“Prayers in Writ Petition No. 4178 of 2007
(a) The present petition be allowed.
(b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set
Page 3 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
aside the order dated 22.05.2007 in case No. 9/07 passed by the
Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Pune, thereby and be
pleased to hold that the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Pune, has no power to review its orders once the Certificate of
Validity is issued and be further pleased to quash and set aside
the complaints filed against the present petitioner and the
proceedings initiated by the Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Pune.

Prayers in Writ Petition No. 4180 of 2007
(a) The present petition be allowed.
(b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set
aside the order dated 22.05.2007 in election case No. 8/07
passed by the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Pune,
thereby and be pleased to hold that the Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Pune, has no power to review its orders
once the Certificate of Validity is issued and be further pleased
to quash and set aside the complaints filed against the present
petitioner and the proceedings initiated by the Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Pune.
Prayers in Writ Petition No. 4181 of 2007
(a) The present petition be allowed.
(b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set
aside the order dated 22.05.2007 in case No. 6/07 passed by the
Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Pune, thereby and be
pleased to hold that the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Pune, has no power to review its orders once the Certificate of
Validity is issued and be further pleased to quash and set aside
the complaints filed against the present petitioner and the
proceedings initiated by the Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee, Pune.
Prayers in Writ Petition No.2662 of 2007
“a) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue
appropriate writ and / or order and /or directions in the nature
of writ thereby quashing and setting aside the impugned order
dated 5-4-2007 passed by the Respondent No. 2 as well as the
notice issued by the Respondent No. 2 dated 7-3-2007 and
declare that the Respondent No. 2 has no power to
rehear/review the case of the Petitioner;
b) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant interim
relief staying the operation, implementation and effect of the
impugned order dated 5-4-2007 passed by the Respondent No.
2;
c) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the
hearing before the Vigilance Cell in the matter of the Petitioner
bearing case No.2/10/2007.”
Page 4 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
3. It is not in dispute that the petitioners in all these petitions were granted

caste certificates by the appropriate authority. The caste certificates issued to the
petitioners were placed before the Caste Scrutiny Committee for verification and
grant of validity. By orders passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, validity was
granted to the caste certificates. It is only after such validity was granted that
pursuant to complaints made by the private respondents, the impugned order was
passed. Since the contention raised before us involves only a legal issue, we do
not intend to delve on any further facts. Suffice it to observe that the only issue
for consideration is whether the Caste Scrutiny Committee has the power to
review its own order, which, as noted hereinabove, according to the petitioners,
stands concluded by several decisions of this Court.
4. The petitioners are assailing the impugned order, primarily on the ground
that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has no power to review its own orders once a
validity certificate has been issued.
5. The three petitions were admitted by an order dated 28 May 2007 passed
by a Division Bench of this Court. Writ Petition No. 2662 of 2007 was admitted
on 13 April 2007.
6. At the outset, Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the
legal issue as raised by the petitioners that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has no
jurisdiction to review its own order, is no more res integra as the same stands
squarely covered by the decisions of this Court rendered during the pendency of
the present proceedings in Rakesh Bhimashankar Umbarje & Ors. vs. State of
Page 5 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
1
Maharashtra through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department & Another .

Mr. Shah has also relied on the decision in Bharat Nagu Garud vs. State of
2
Maharashtra & Others .
7. Ms. Gavhane, learned AGP, would not dispute that the Division Bench of
this Court, in the aforesaid decisions, has categorically held that the Caste
Scrutiny Committee is a creature of statute, being constituted under the
Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta
Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category
(Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 (for short,
the “said Act”). It is also not disputed that the said Act does not confer any
specific power of review on the Caste Scrutiny Committee to review the final
decision taken by it.
8. In the aforesaid backdrop, it would be appropriate to note the observations
made by the Division Bench of this Court in Rakesh Bhimashankar Umbarje &
Ors. (supra), wherein, the Court analyzing the provisions inter alia of Section 7 of
the Act, held that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has no authority and jurisdiction
to review its final orders. The Court observed thus:-
“15. In the above circumstances, the issue which would fall for our
consideration is whether the Caste Scrutiny Committee at all had
jurisdiction to review its own decision granting caste validity certificate to
the petitioners, including those granted under orders passed by this
Court.
16. In this context, we need to examine the legislation under which
the Caste Scrutiny Committee is constituted and is required to exercise its
jurisdiction. The legislation is the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes,
1 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1013
2 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2537
Page 6 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes,
Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of
Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000. The Act
provides for the regulation of the issuance and verification of the caste
certificates to the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled
Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other
Backward Classes and Special Backward Category and for matters
connected therewith or incidental thereto. Section 2 of the Act deals with
the definitions such as caste certificates, competent authority, scrutiny
committee, etc.

17. Section 4 of the Act requires the caste certificates to be issued by
the competent authority. Sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Act states
that a caste certificate issued by any person, officer or authority other
than the competent authority shall be invalid. The caste certificate issued
by the competent authority shall be valid only subject to the verification
and grant of validity certificate by the Scrutiny Committee. Section 5 of
the Act deals with the provisions of appeal in case any person is aggrieved
by an order of rejection of an application passed by the competent
authority under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act. Section 6 of the
Act deals with the verification of caste certificates by a Scrutiny
Committee.
18. Section 7 of the Act deals with the confiscation and cancellation
of false caste certificates. Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Act, deals
with the power of the Scrutiny Committee to cancel or confiscate caste
certificates and not caste validity certificates. Sub-section (1) of Section 7
of the Act is relevant; therefore, the same is transcribed below.
“ Where, before or after the commencement of this Act, a person
not belonging to any of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes,
De-notified Tribe (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other
Backward Classes or Special Backward category has obtained a false
caste certificate to the effect that either himself or his children
belong to such castes, tribes or classes, the scrutiny committee may,
suo motu or otherwise call for the record and enquire into the
correctness of such certificate and if it is of the opinion that the
certificate was obtained fraudulently, it shall, by an order cancel
and confiscate the certificate by following such procedure as
prescribed, after giving the person concerned an opportunity of
being heard, and communicate the same to the concerned person
and the concerned authority, if any."
19. Further, sub-section (2) of Section 7 speaks of the order passed
by the Scrutiny Committee under this Act shall be final and shall not be
challenged before any Authority or Court except the High Court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Section 15 of the Act concerns
bar of jurisdiction of Civil Court.
20. It would be appropriate to note the relevant provisions of the
Act, as noted by us above, which reads thus:
“Section 2 Definitions .
In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,--
Page 7 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
(a) "Caste Certificate" means the certificate issued by the
Competent Authority to an applicant indicating therein the
Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, De-notified Tribe (Vimukta
Jatis), Nomadic Tribe, Other Backward Class or Special Backward
Category, as the case may be, to which such applicant belongs;

(
b) "Competent Authority" means a officer or authority authorised
by the Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, to
issue a Caste Certificate, for such area or for such purposes as may
be specified in the said notification and shall include all the
Competent Authorities already designated by the Government
before the coming into force of this Act, having jurisdiction over
the area or place to which the applicant originally belongs, unless
specified otherwise;
(k) " Scrutiny Committee " means the Committee or committees
constituted under sub-section (1) of section 6 for the Scheduled
Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis),
Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes or Special Backward
Category for verification of the Caste Certificate and to perform
the function of Scrutiny Committee under this Act;
Section 4 Caste Certificate to be issued by Competent Authority.
(1) The Competent Authority may, on an application made to it
under section 3, after satisfying itself about the genuineness of the
claim and following the procedure as prescribed, issue a Caste
Certificate within such time limit and in such form as may be
prescribed or reject the application for reasons to be recorded in
writing.
(2) A Caste Certificate issued by any person, officer or authority
other than the Competent Authority shall be invalid. The Caste
Certificate issued by the Competent Authority shall be valid only
subject to the verification and grant of validity certificate by the
Scrutiny Committee.
Section 5 Appeal.
(1) Any person aggrieved by an order of rejection of application
passed by the Competent Authority under sub-section (1) of
section 4 may, within 30 days from the date of receipt of order,
appeal to the Appellate Authority specified by the Government by
notification in the Official Gazette.
(2) The Appellate Authority may within a period of three months,
after giving the appellant an opportunity of being heard and after
satisfying itself about the genuineness or otherwise of the claim of
the appellant either confirm the rejection order, or set aside the
order of the Competent Authority and direct the Competent
Authority to issue the caste certificate.
Section 6 Verification of Caste Certificate by Scrutiny Committee
(1) The Government shall constitute by notification in the Official
Gazette, one or more Scrutiny Committee(s) for verification of
Caste Certificates issued by the Competent Authorities under sub-
Page 8 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
section (1) of section 4 specifying in the said notification the
functions and the area of jurisdiction of each of such Scrutiny
Committee or Committees.

(2) After obtaining the Caste Certificate from the Competent
Authority, any person desirous of availing of the benefits or
concessions provided to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes,
De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other
Backward Classes or Special Backward Category for the purposes
mentioned in section 3 may make an application, well in time, in
such form and in such manner as may be prescribed, to the
concerned Scrutiny Committee for the verification of such Caste
Certificate and issue of a validity certificate.
(3) The appointing authority of the Central or State Government,
local authority, public sector undertakings, educational
institutions, Co-operative Societies or any other Government
aided institutions shall, make an application in such form and in
such manner as may be prescribed by the Scrutiny Committees for
the verification of the Caste Certificate and issue of a validity
certificate, in case a person selected for an appointment with the
Government, local authority, public sector undertakings,
educational institutions, Co-operative societies or any other
Government aided institutions who has not obtain such certificate.
(4) The Scrutiny Committee shall follow such procedure for
verification of the Caste Certificate and adhere to the time limit for
verification and grant of validity certificate, as prescribed.
Section 7 Confiscation and cancellation of false Certificate.
(1) Where, before or after the commencement of this Act, a person
not belonging to any of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes,
De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other
Backward Classes or Special Backward Category has obtained a
false Caste Certificate to the effect that either himself or his
children belong to such Castes, Tribes or Classes, the Scrutiny
Committee may, suo motu, or otherwise call for the record and
enquire into the correctness of such certificate and if it is of the
opinion that the certificate was obtained fraudulently, it shall, by
an order cancel and confiscate the certificate by following such
procedure as prescribed, after giving the person concerned an
opportunity of being heard, and communicate the same to the
concerned person and the concerned authority, if any.
(2) The order passed by the Scrutiny Committee under this Act
shall be final and shall not be challenged before any authority or
court except the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India
Section 9 Civil Court powers to Competent Authority, Appellate
Authority, and Scrutiny Committee
The Competent Authority, the Appellate Authority and the
Scrutiny Committee shall, while holding an enquiry under this
Act, have all the powers of a Civil Court while trying a suit under
Page 9 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and in particular in respect of
the following matters, namely:--

(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and
examining him on oath;
(b) requiring the discovery and production of any document;
(c) receiving evidence on affidavits;
(d) requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any
Court or office; and
(e) issuing Commissions for the examination of witnesses or
documents.
Section 15 Bar of jurisdiction of Civil Courts.
"No Civil Court shall have jurisdiction to entertain, to continue
or to decide any suit or proceeding or shall pass any decree or order
or execute wholly or partially any decree or order, if the claim
involved in such suit or proceeding, or if the passing of such decree
or order or if such execution would in any way be contrary to the
provisions of this Act."
21. The scheme of the Act as noticed from the aforesaid provisions
would reveal that it would be the exclusive jurisdiction of the Caste
Scrutiny Committee to consider the application for a caste validity
certificate as provided for in Section 6. Sub-section (2) of Section 7
clearly provides that the orders passed by the Scrutiny Committee under
this Act shall be final and shall not be challenged before any authority or
Court except the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India. Thus, against any order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee,
the remedy for a person aggrieved is only to approach the High Court by
invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
and in no other manner.
22. We need to observe that there ought not to be any confusion
between the provision of sub-section (1) of Section 7 and what has been
provided in sub-section (2), for the reason that sub-section (1) deals with
a situation that where, before or after the commencement of the Act, a
person not belonging to any Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-
notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward
Classes or Special Backward Category has obtained a false 'Caste
Certificate' (not a validity certificate) to the effect that either himself or
his children belong to such Castes, the Scrutiny Committee in such an
event and in relation to the caste certificate, may suo motu, or otherwise
call for the record and enquire into the correctness of 'such certificate'
(caste certificate) and if it is the opinion that the caste certificate was
obtained fraudulently, it shall, by an order cancel and confiscate 'the
certificate' by following such procedure as prescribed, after giving the
person concerned an opportunity of being heard, and communicate the
same to the concerned person and the concerned authority, if any.
23. When sub-section (1) of Section 7 uses the word caste certificate
necessarily, the meaning of the same is required to be derived as per the
Page 10 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
definition of the caste certificate as contained in Section 2(a), which
defines caste certificate to mean a certificate issued by any person, officer
or authority other than the Competent Authority shall be invalid. The
Caste Certificate issued by the Competent Authority shall be valid only
subject to the verification and grant of validity certificate by the Scrutiny
Committee.

24. Thus, a 'caste certificate' is certainly not a 'caste validity certificate',
as issuance of a caste validity certificate is an independent exercise to be
undertaken by the Caste Scrutiny Committee by exercising its quasi-
judicial powers. It is hence clear that the power conferred on the Caste
Scrutiny Committee under sub-section (1) of Section 7 to enquire into
any false caste certificate and form an opinion that a caste certificate was
obtained fraudulently and to cancel and confiscate the certificate as
ordered in sub-section (1) of Section 7, cannot be read to mean that the
Caste Scrutiny Committee has the power to review its own orders/
decisions granting caste validity certificate in case of a complaint being
made that the caste validity certificate has been obtained fraudulently by
any applicant seeking validity of the caste certificate.
25. It is quite clear from the reading of sub-section (2) that not only such
orders passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee under sub-section (1)
but orders passed by the Scrutiny Committee under the provisions of
"the Act", which would include a grant of a caste validity certificate, shall
be final and cannot be challenged before any Authority or Court except
the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This
clearly infers that once a decision is taken by the Caste Scrutiny
Committee either under the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 7 or
under the provisions of Section 6, the Caste Scrutiny Committee
becomes functus officio, and such decision can only be assailed by
approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India. There cannot be any other reading from the provisions of sub-
section (2) of Section 7.
26. Thus, from the scheme of the legislation it is clear that the Caste
Scrutiny Committee would not have any jurisdiction to review/revisit its
own orders and decisions granting caste validity certificates. This would
also be clear from the reading of Section 9. It may also be observed that
the legislature is conscious in making available limited powers of the
Civil Court to the Competent Authority, Appellate Authority and the
Scrutiny Committee, which are specifically enumerated in Section 9.
The legislature has consciously avoided to confer the powers of a review
as envisaged under Section 114, read with provisions of Order 47 of the
Code of Civil Procedure. Once such provision conferring powers of a
review are excluded in their application to the Caste Scrutiny
Committee, there is no question of such powers being conferred by any
implication under any circumstances.
27. Considering the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 7,
consciously, the legislature has not conferred powers on the authority
issuing caste certificate to revisit the decision to issue caste certificate and
cancel the same in view of fraud and misrepresentation. Such power is
conferred on a higher authority, namely on the Caste Scrutiny
Page 11 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
Committee. The contention of the learned AGP that because the Caste
Scrutiny Committee had issued validity certificate, it would have
jurisdiction to revisit/review its decision when there is fraud and
misrepresentation is totally untenable. As noted above, the legislature
was fully conscious of the fact that a validity certificate could be obtained
from the Caste Scrutiny Committee by playing fraud, however,
consciously, the legislature has avoided to confer any power of review on
the Caste Scrutiny Committee to review/revisit its own decision even in
case of fraud, misrepresentation or suppression of material facts. In fact,
such an interpretation would defeat the mandate of sub-section (2) of
Section 7.

28. It would need no emphasis that the power to review any order in the
nature of the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee would be the
power required to be expressly conferred by the provisions of the
legislation under which the Caste Scrutiny Committee functions.
29. If the contention, as urged on behalf of the respondent, that the
Scrutiny Committee has jurisdiction to review its own decision/ orders,
although not expressly conferred by law, is accepted, the situation is just
to be imagined, inasmuch as on any complaint alleging fraud and in
respect of cases wherein the validity to a caste certificate has been
continued by substantive orders passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee
or under orders passed by the High Court or the Supreme Court, cannot
be reopened by the Caste Scrutiny Committee on any complaint of
fraud. This certainly is not the intention of the legislation to unsettle the
concluded issues wherein the caste validity certificates are granted as per
law and under orders passed by the higher Courts. It is for such reason
the legislature has categorically avoided conferring any powers of review
on the Caste Scrutiny Committee.
30. We are thus of the clear opinion that in the event a complaint being
made in regard to any validity certificate granted by Caste Scrutiny
Committee to be vitiated by fraud or illegality, the only course open to
such a complainant or otherwise any person/authority is to approach the
High Court by invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the
Constitution and seek its interference in setting aside the validity
certificate granted in favour of such person in view of the clear
provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 7 of the Act. It is in such
proceedings under Article 226 the Court would be required to apply its
mind as to whether the allegations of fraud or any illegality are of such
nature that the decision of the Caste Scrutiny Committee was vitiated
and is required to be set aside. This would assume more significance as a
grant of caste validity certificate confers substantive rights on the person
holding such certificate, by virtue of which a right in rem is conferred on
such person on the basis of such caste validity certificate.
31. It cannot be countenanced that a Caste Scrutiny Committee assumes
jurisdiction to review its orders merely on a complaint filed by any
person and upsets the earlier orders passed by it. Thus, the proposition,
as canvassed by the learned AGP, would lead not only to an absurdity
but the proposition totally untenable in law and not recognized by the
legislation.
32. Our above observations also find support in Akash Sanjay Gawali
Page 12 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
(supra), wherein it was held that:

“6. The action of 2nd Respondent committee prima facie appears to
be vindictive. It is also completely illegal. This committee has no
suo motu power of review. In case after case, it seems to rely on a
general principle that 'fraud vitiates everything' without realising
the implications of this or how that fraud is to be detected,
ascertained, proved and results based on such a finding. Perhaps this
committee has no idea how difficult it is to actually prove fraud. A
failure of proof is not fraud. That so-called 'fraud' must arise in the
proceeding before it. It cannot be invoked like some mantra to
confer on oneself a power of review over orders passed many years
earlier, and which no one has called into question, about which
there is no lis or proceeding, and which have all attained finality.
This is so basic a concept in law that we are surprised that the
committee is so utterly oblivious to it. To be plain: no one ever
assailed the petitioner's father's and uncles' validity certificates on
any ground. The committee had no power to suo motu re-open
those validity certificates and call them into question. The
committee's orders are not purely ministerial to admit of the narrow
exception to the general rule that there is no inherent power of
review.
7. We find it surprising that we have to repeatedly state that this
committee has no suo motu power of review. None is conferred by
statute. None can be necessarily inferred. The impugned order is
entirely without jurisdiction.
8. This is also a case of the 2nd respondent committee inviting
extreme censure for wholly overreaching this Court. Only because
this Court in its order of 13 December 2018 in Writ Petition No.
10194 of 2018 entered a caveat that should the certificates of the
uncles or father be recalled or set aside then the petitioner could not
get any benefit, the 2nd respondent committee could not have seen
this as an opportunity to go ahead and do something that was
entirely outside its jurisdiction."
(emphasis supplied)
33. It can be clearly noticed that it has been a consistent view in
various decisions that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has no
jurisdiction to review its own orders. There is no dispute whatsoever
on this proposition and the Courts would be required to adhere to
the mandate of what has been provided for in law i.e. sub-section
(2) of Section 7 that the challenge to any decision taken under the
Act by the Caste Scrutiny Committee can only be challenged before
the High Court by invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. Furthermore, it is a settled position in law
that when substantive provisions are clear, such jurisdiction cannot
be conferred by any subordinate legislation or by any executive fiat.
34. As the Caste Scrutiny Committee has no powers to review, there
is no question of any suo motu powers to be exercised by the Caste
Scrutiny Committee and in any exercise of such suo motu
jurisdiction would be invalid, illegal and contrary to the provisions
of the Act.”
(emphasis supplied)
Page 13 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]

9. In Bharat Nagu Garud (supra), a Division Bench of this Court has taken a
similar view. The Court considered an additional issue, namely, a specific
contention as raised on behalf of the State that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has
“inherent jurisdiction” to review its own order. The said contention was also
negatived by the Division Bench of this Court in the said decision. The relevant
observations of the Court in such context are required to be noted, which read
thus:-
“33. It can be clearly noticed that it has been a consistent view in
various decisions that the Caste Scrutiny Committee has no
jurisdiction to review its own orders. There is no dispute whatsoever
on this proposition and the Courts would be required to adhere to
the mandate of what has been provided for in law i.e. sub-section (2)
of Section 7 that the challenge to any decision taken under the Act
by the Caste Scrutiny Committee can only be challenged before the
High Court by Invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. Furthermore, it is a settled position in law
that when substantive provisions are clear, such jurisdiction cannot
be conferred by any subordinate legislation or by any executive fiat.
34. As the Caste Scrutiny Committee has no powers to review,
there is no question of any suo motu powers to be exercised by the
Caste Scrutiny Committee and in any exercise of such suo motu
jurisdiction would be invalid, illegal and contrary to the provisions
of the Act.
34. Despite the above clear position as held by this Court, Mr.
Gangal, learned special counsel for the State would submit that although
the provisions of the 2000 Act, do not expressly confer any power on the
Caste Scrutiny Committee to review its own orders, nonetheless the
Caste Scrutiny Committee has "inherent jurisdiction" to review its own
orders. In support of such contention, Mr. Gangal has placed reliance on
the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Sangita Sharad
Kolse (supra), which is a decision prior to the decision of the Division
Bench in Apoorva d/o. Vinay Nichale (supra). After such decision, there
are several decisions of this Court which has taken a consistent view that
the statute (2000 Act) does not confer any powers of review on the
Caste Scrutiny Committee and once such powers of review are not
conferred, in such event, it cannot be held that the Caste Scrutiny
Committee can exercise review jurisdiction on any other parameters,
including on the issue of fraud. Thus, in our opinion, the decision of the
Division Bench in Smt. Sangita Sharad Kolse (supra) would not assist
Mr. Gangal.
44. This apart, in our opinion, if in a situation that a Caste Scrutiny
Page 14 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
Committee has granted validity to a caste certificate and the same is
being questioned later on (in present cases after long lapse of time) it can
only be on a prima facie satisfaction of the High Court in any acceptable
and legitimate proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution that
such a plea needs to be accepted for reopening/re-examination of the
issue by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, and not otherwise. There cannot
be a free hand or a licence to the Caste Scrutiny Committee to reopen
concluded cases of validity being conferred by it by its earlier orders to
be revisited or re-examined on a complaint or otherwise and review its
orders.

45. Also such contentions as urged on behalf of the State that the
Caste Scrutiny Committee has inherent powers to review its own orders
would lead to devastating consequences, as rightly urged on behalf of the
petitioners. Such consequence would be: -
(i) That the Caste Scrutiny Committee would be permitted to form
its subjective opinion on a decision taken by a co-ordinate
Committee irrespective of the period when such decision was taken
either suo motu or otherwise;
(ii) A pure subjective opinion of the Caste Scrutiny Committee
would be as to what according to it would be a case of
misrepresentation and fraud, so as to reopen concluded case of an
earlier validity being granted;
(iii) Such reopening of the validity already granted would be
without any restriction as to limitation (as in the present case),
creating a situation to unsettle concluded issues;
(iv) Even to make allegations of a fraud on a concluded issued
under the general law would be covered by a prescribed period
limitation. Even if validity has been fraudulently obtained, it
cannot be that on an allegation of fraud in a given case, issues can
be reopened after such enormous delay of 15 to 20 years although
it may be a consideration to decide future cases.
46. Thus in our opinion, the Caste Scrutiny Committee, being a
statutory body exercising quasi adjudicatory functions, would not have
any jurisdiction to suo motu verify the past records and initiate an action
to reopen past decision and invalidate the caste validity certificates
already granted. If an inherent power of review is to be read in the
provisions of the 2000 Act, it would lead to a monumental uncertainty
and absurdity in the functioning of the Caste Scrutiny Committee, as it
can be at the ipse dixit of the Caste Scrutiny Committee to reopen
concluded cases. This would lead to patent arbitrariness. For such
reasons, it is not possible to come to a conclusion that any inherent
power of review is available with the Caste Scrutiny Committee.
47. This apart as noted above, in the decisions as rendered by this
Court, it has been consistently held that there is no jurisdiction as
conferred by the 2000 Act on the Caste Scrutiny Committee to review
its own order either on an application or suo motu. The nature of
adjudication as undertaken by the Caste Scrutiny Committee is certainly
quasi-judicial in nature where admittedly there is an enquiry after
Page 15 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::

205 TO 207-WP [email protected]
hearing the parties (including hearing a third party/complainant) and
after considering the vigilance report and the documentary and oral
evidence, a decision is required to be taken by the Caste Scrutiny
Committee. In the absence of a Caste Scrutiny Committee, such powers
to make any such declaration to the caste certificate, could only be
wielded by the Civil Court. Thus, certainly a caste scrutiny committee is
exercising such vital jurisdiction, which otherwise would have been
exercised by a civil court. Even from such perspective, it cannot be held
that any inherent powers of review are conferred on the Caste Scrutiny
Committee. Even otherwise considering the nature of functions of the
Caste Scrutiny Committee, the legislature itself has avoided to confer
any review powers which could have been conferred by the legislature, as
observed by the Division Bench of this Court in Rakesh Bhimashankar
Umbarje (supra). Even when a review jurisdiction is conferred by law on
Courts, it is circumscribed by strict rules, namely, adjudicating any
review proceedings on the touchstone of the principles as contained in
Code of Civil Procedure and as also the applicability of the law of
limitation . It is thus difficult to accept the case as urged on behalf of the
State that the Caste Scrutiny Committee would be a body which is
beyond the applicability of any restriction and rules, which are
necessarily applicable to bodies conferred with review jurisdiction.

48. For the above reasons, we are not persuaded to accept any of the
contentions as urged by Mr. Gangal so as to read any review jurisdiction
being conferred on the Caste Scrutiny Committee, to review the past
decisions, when the decision of the Caste Scrutiny Committee either
rejecting the validity or granting validity is only subject to jurisdiction of
this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.”
10. In the aforesaid circumstances, the position in law being well settled, the
Caste Scrutiny Committee has no authority to exercise review jurisdiction in
passing orders, as impugned in the present proceedings. Such orders are passed
wholly without jurisdiction, and are a nullity, requiring the same to be quashed
and set aside.
11. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed by Caste Scrutiny Committee,
subject matter of assail in the present proceedings, are quashed and set aside.
Each of these Writ Petitions is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
12. No costs.
(AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Page 16 of 16
18 June 2026
::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2026 15:33:04 :::