Full Judgment Text
2025:BHC-NAG:11290-DB
Judgment 1 J-WP No.1321.2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 1321 OF 2024
Vijay S/o Govardhan Patkar,
Aged about 57 years,
Occupation - Service,
R/o. Matodi, Akola,
Tah. and Dist. Akola.. …. PETITIONER
// VERSUS //
1) The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate
Scrutiny Committee,
Through its Member/Secretary,
Bhatkuli Road, Amravati,
District Amravati.
2) The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Akola, Tq. and Dist. Akola. …. RESPONDENTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Rajashree Kabra, Advocate holding for Mr. S. D. Khati,
Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. A. M. Kadukar, Assistant Government Pleader for the
Respondents.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MRS. M. S. JAWALKAR AND
RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ.
DATE O N RESERVING THE JUDGMENT : 07.10.2025
DATE ON PRONOUNCING THE JUDGMENT : 17.10.2025
JUDGMENT : (Per – M. S. JAWALKAR, J.)
Judgment 2 J-WP No.1321.2024.odt
1. Heard. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
Matter is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission by
consent of the parties and at the request of parties.
2. By this Writ Petition, the Petitioner is challenging the
order dated 25/01/2024, passed by the Respondent No.1
Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati
(for short the “Scrutiny Committee”), thereby invalidating the
caste claim of the Petitioner to the “Koli Mahadeo” Scheduled
Tribe enlisted at Sr. No. 29 in the list of Scheduled Tribes in
Constitutional (S.T.) Order 1950 and orders dated 22/08/2023
passed by the Respondent No.2 – Sub-Divisional Officer, Akola
thereby rejected the caste claim of the Petitioner.
3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the
Petitioner belongs to “Koli Mahadeo” Scheduled Tribe therefore
submitted an application along with numerous documents to the
Respondent No.2 Sub-Divisional Officer, Akola for grant of
Scheduled Tribe Certificates, which came to be rejected vide
order dated 22/08/2023. Thereafter an appeal was preferred
before the Respondent No.1 Scrutiny Committee, wherein the
Judgment 3 J-WP No.1321.2024.odt
order dated 22/08/2023 passed by Respondent No.2 was
confirmed and dismissed the appeal vide order dated
25/01/2024.
4. It is also submitted that the Respondent no 2
declined caste Certificate on the ground of variance in the dates
mentioned in the Kotwal Book extracts pertaining to the
Petitioner’s grandfather and father. The Respondents also failed
to consider the caste certificate issued to the Petitioner’s father
dated 19/06/1983, which unequivocally mentions the caste as
‘Mahadeo Koli’ and erred in failing to consider the birth record
of Govardhan, son of Manikrao Gangaram (the Petitioner’s
grandfather), dated 23/07/1925, which clearly and
unequivocally records the caste as ‘Koli Mahadeo (Scheduled
Tribe)’.
5. It is further submitted that the Petitioner had
submitted all requisite documents before the Respondent No.2
for issuance of the caste certificate. It was incumbent upon
Respondent No.2 to issue the certificate, which would thereafter
Judgment 4 J-WP No.1321.2024.odt
be subject to verification by the Scrutiny Committee. However,
both respondents have failed to discharge their duties denying
justice to the petitioner. It is further contended that this Court
has recently dealt with the identical issues in W.P. No.
8327/2022, W.P. No. 11671/2021 (Aurangabad Bench), and
W.P. No. 4335/2023, wherein by orders dated 12/01/2023,
07/07/2023, and 01/09/2023, respectively, both the orders
passed by the Scrutiny Committee and the Sub-Divisional Officer
were set aside, and directions were issued to the Sub-Divisional
Officer to issue caste certificates. After the Sub-Divisional Officer
(Respondent No. 2) rejected the Petitioner’s caste claim on
22/08/2023, and the Scrutiny Committee (Respondent No. 1)
went on to adjudicate the caste claim of the Petitioner without
there being a caste certificate, thereby dismissing the appeal and
confirmed the finding of Respondent no 2 by order dated
25/01/2024.
6. As against this, the Respondents contended that they
rejected the petitioner’s request for a caste certificate of “Koli
Mahadev” (Scheduled Tribe) because of variance in respect of
Judgment 5 J-WP No.1321.2024.odt
dates mentioned in Kotwal Book extract pertaining to
grandfather and father of the Petitioner, resultantly declining
caste certificate to the Petitioner, subsequently the Respondent
No.1 went on to adjudicate the matter on the ground of variance
in the extracts of Kotwal Book.
7. Heard both the parties at length. Perused the
documents placed on record.
8. We are placing reliance on Writ Petition
No.2011/2024 wherein an identical issue had arisen, and dealt
by this Court and relevant portions are reproduced as under :
“8. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied
upon the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.
7081 of 2024 (Sushil S/o Rajendra Thakur and
others Vs. The Sub Divisional Officer, Daryapur, Dist.
Amravati and another) decided on 10th March, 2025.
In the said judgment, the identical issue was arose
and this Court has recorded its findings in paragraphs
6, 7 and 8 as under:
(6) It is settled position of law that the competent
authority under Section 4 of the Maharashtra
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified
Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other
Backward Classes and Special Backward Category
Judgment 6 J-WP No.1321.2024.odt
(Regulation of Issuance and Verification of Caste
Certificate Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as
'Act of 2000') while issuing caste certificate is not
entitled to make a detailed enquiry as to the
validity of the claim of the petitioners of
belonging to particular Caste/Tribe; for that is the
job of the Committee constituted under Section 6
of the said Act.
(7) A perusal of the impugned orders dated
15/05/2024 (Annexures 4 to 8) passed by the
Sub-Divisional Officer, who is the competent
authority in terms of Section 4 of the Act of 2000,
would indicate that he has gone into the question
of validity of the claim of the petitioners, which is
impermissible in law. Thus, it seems that the Sub-
Divisional Officer exceeded its jurisdiction while
refusing to grant caste certificates to the
petitioners. Similar is the position in respect of
the order dated 28/08/2024 passed by the
respondent No.2 the Committee. The respondent
No.2 Committee has not considered the
documents produced on record by the petitioners
in their proper perspective.
(8) Apart from this, the position in this matter is
no longer res integra, but it is covered by the
judgment of this Court in Namdeo s/o. Baburao
Ingale and ors. vs. Scheduled Tribe Caste
Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati
[2015(2)Mh.L.J.707], Dhanashree Ravindra Koli
and others V/s The state of Mah. & ors. In
W.P.No.8829/20021 decided on 12/08/21 and
followed subsequently in Vishal Namdeo
Gopewad vs. The Scheduled Tribe Caste
Certificate Scrutiny Committee, through its
Member/Secretary, Yavatmal and another [WP
Judgment 7 J-WP No.1321.2024.odt
No. 4335/2023 decided on 01/09/2023, in view
of which, the impugned orders dated 15/05/2024
passed by respondent No.1 SubDivisional Officer,
as well as the decision dated 28/08/2024 passed
by the respondent No.2 Committee, are hereby
quashed and set aside.
9. In view of the above settled legal position, it is
evident that Respondent No. 2, while exercising powers under
Section 4 of the Act of 2000, was not required to delve into the
question of validity of the Petitioner’s caste claim. Such an
exercise was clearly impermissible under the provisions of law,
and therefore, the Respondent No. 2, by rejecting the Petitioners’
application, acted beyond the scope of his jurisdiction.
10. Similarly, Respondent No. 1 – the Scrutiny
Committee – while deciding the appeal preferred by the
Petitioner against the impugned order passed by respondent
No. 2, also exceeded its jurisdiction. The Committee proceeded
to decide the appeal despite no caste certificate being issued by
Respondent No. 2 to the Petitioner, adjudicating upon the
validity without there being any caste certificate, which was not
at all within its function at that stage. The respondent No. 1 was
Judgment 8 J-WP No.1321.2024.odt
not justified in dismissing the appeal on the grounds of variance
in Kotwal Book extract. Such an approach was contrary to the
provisions of the Act and inconsistent with the law laid down by
this Court.
11. In view of the foregoing discussion, the impugned
orders passed by both respondents are liable to be quashed and
set aside. Accordingly, the following order is passed:
(i) Writ Petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 25/01/2024 passed by
the Respondent No. 1- Caste Scrutiny Committee,
Amravati, so also the order dated 22/08/2023 passed
by the Respondent No. 2- Sub Divisional Officer,
Akola are hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) The Respondent No. 2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Akola,
is hereby directed to issue a Caste Certificate to the
Petitioner under section 4 of the Maharashtra
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified
Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other
Backward Classes and Special Backward Category
(Regulation Of Issuance and Verification Of) Caste
Judgment 9 J-WP No.1321.2024.odt
Certificate Act, 2000, within a period of three weeks
from the date of production of this order to his office.
(iv) Respondent No. 1 is directed to consider the caste
claim of the Petitioner if the same is referred as per
prescribed procedure, afresh, on the basis of caste
certificate issued by the Respondent No. 2 without
coming into influence of the findings recorded in the
impugned order dated 25/01/1024 passed by the
Respondent No. 1- Committee.
12. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order
as to costs.
(RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)
Kirtak
Signed by: Mr. B.J. Kirtak
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 18/10/2025 16:59:26