Bombay High Court

Bombay HC Orders Thakur ST Validity for Morey, Citing His Grandfather’s 1933 Record and Close Relatives’ Validity Certificates

Santosh Atmaram Morey vs State Of Maharashtra And Others

Bombay High CourtJUDGMENT: October 22, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Bombay HC Orders Thakur ST Validity for Morey, Citing His Grandfather’s 1933 Record and Close Relatives’ Validity Certificates. Santosh Atmaram Morey vs State Of Maharashtra And Others. Bombay High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioner’s claim to belong to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe was invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee on 5 April 2002, principally because he failed the affinity test.

Source reference: p. 1; paras. 11–14

The record included a 1933 Kotwal Register entry recording the petitioner’s grandfather as “Thakur,” a school transfer certificate recording his father as “Thakur,” and caste-validity decisions concerning close relatives.

Source reference: pp. 5–7; paras. 8–10

The petition was considered after the Supreme Court set aside the dismissal of a group of petitions and directed that the cases be decided individually.

Source reference: p. 2; para. 2
02

Issues

1. Whether the petitioner’s claim to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe could be invalidated principally on the basis of failure to satisfy the affinity test, despite the documentary evidence on record.

Source reference: pp. 7–8; paras. 11–15

2. Whether valid and subsisting caste-validity certificates granted to the petitioner’s close blood relatives supported granting relief to the petitioner.

Source reference: p. 8; para. 16
03

Law Applied

The Court applied the principles in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 326, and Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale v. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No. 1 & Ors., 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 1053.

Source reference: p. 8; paras. 15–16

It held that an affinity test cannot, by itself, be the basis for rejecting a caste or tribe claim where relevant documentary evidence has not been discarded; the Court also treated the valid and subsisting certificates of close blood relatives as material supporting the petitioner’s claim.

Source reference: p. 8; paras. 15–16

No statute was identified as a basis of decision in the judgment.

Source reference: no citation
04

Reasoning

The Committee had not rejected the “Thakur” entries in the pre-constitutional and other records; it considered them insufficient and relied on the petitioner’s failure to establish affinity with the Scheduled Tribe.

Source reference: pp. 7–8; paras. 11–14

Applying the cited precedents, the Court found that invalidation on that basis did not withstand legal scrutiny.

Source reference: p. 8; paras. 15–16

It also relied on the validity certificates granted to the petitioner’s cousin and cousin-nephew, which remained valid and subsisting.

Source reference: p. 8; paras. 15–16
05

Holding

The Court allowed the petition and quashed the Scrutiny Committee’s order dated 5 April 2002.

It directed the Committee to issue the petitioner a caste-validity certificate as belonging to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe within 12 weeks of communication of the order.

Source reference: p. 9; Order

No order as to costs was made.

Source reference: p. 9; para. 17
Bombay High Court

Original Court PDF

Santosh Atmaram MoreyvsState Of Maharashtra And Others

Bombay High Court · October 22, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment