Vaishnavi Jitendra Ghoti v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Another
1 WP / 10826 / 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10826 OF 2023 Vaishnavi D/o Jitendra Ghoti .. Petitioner
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra, Department of Tribal Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32 Through its Secretary 2] The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad office at Aurangabad Through its Member Secretary .. Respondents ...
Advocate for petitioner : Mr. Mahesh S. Deshmukh h/f. Mr. Vivek U. Jadhav Addl.GP for the respondent - State : Mr. S.B. Yawalkar ...
CORAM
: MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 26 SEPTEMBER 2023 ORDER (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) :
The petitioner is challenging the order of the scrutiny committee whereby the committee has confiscated and cancelled her certificate of Naikda scheduled tribe.
2.
The learned advocate for the petitioner Mr. Deshmukh would submit that the order is perverse and arbitrary. The committee has ignored the consistent school record of the petitioner and her blood relations wherein they have been described as Naikda. The contrary entries being relied on by the committee to discard the claim have been duly explained by the petitioner in her reply to the vigilance report. It is
2 WP / 10826 / 2023 due to failure of school authorities and the error committed by them that such contrary entries have appeared. The committee has failed to appreciate the fact that all these contrary entries are of old time when for want of literacy, the castes were recorded as "Ma Vanjari" in the school record as well as the revenue record for which the petitioner cannot be blamed.
3.
Mr. Deshmukh would further submit that irrespective of the documentary evidence, the petitioner's blood relation - Prakash Kartarsing Ghoti possesses a certificate of validity which was issued by following the due process of law and in view of the decision in the matter of Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti Vs. State of Maharashtra and others; 2023 SCC Online SC 326, the petitioner is entitled to have a certificate of validity based on his validity. 4.
Mr. Deshmukh would then, in the alternative, submit that though Prakash had not come forward to file any affidavit in petitioner's support when the enquiry was going on before the scrutiny committee but subsequently, he has filed an affidavit dated 22.08.2023 in her support which is filed in the writ petition and the petitioner may be granted an opportunity to go before the committee again and satisfy it about her blood relation with Prakash.
5.
Mr. Yawalkar, the learned AGP supports the order. He submits that the committee has meticulously referred to and pointed
3 WP / 10826 / 2023 out consistent pre-constitutional revenue record to substantiate its conclusion that the petitioner's paternal ancestors for years were regarded as "Ma Vanjari" or "Mathure Vanjari" or "Vanjari Naik". This contrary revenue as well as the school record collected during the vigilance enquiry has not been properly explained by the petitioner in her reply much less denying that it is the record of her ancestors related to her by blood. For want of such demur, no exception can be taken to the inference drawn by the committee holding that the family does not belong to Naikda scheduled tribe. He would submit that even if the petitioner is now seeking to derive the benefit of Prakash's validity, enormous material collected by the vigilance and referred to in the impugned order, is sufficient to refuse to extend the benefit of his validity.
6.
Mr. Yawalkar would then submit that the petitioner is now seeking to derive the benefit of Prakash's validity as an afterthought. She had never sought to rely upon any such validity and it is only after rejection of the proposal by the impugned order that she is able to procure his affidavit in support of her claim. He would point out that in his own matter, Prakash's statement was recorded wherein he had expressly mentioned that his great grandfather Sangati was a single child and had no real brother or sister whereas the petitioner now claims and even she has come forward showing a genealogy wherein petitioner's great great grandfather Birsing is being shown to be brother
4 WP / 10826 / 2023 of Sangati. He would point out that even in his vigilance enquiry, a genealogy was prepared under his signature wherein his great grandfather Sangati was shown to be the only son of his father Chintaman. He would, therefore, submit that such an attempt to resort to the genealogy which is inconsistent with Prakash's stand when he was claiming validity, cannot be allowed to be used being an afterthought.
7.
Mr. Yawalkar would submit that even otherwise the contrary evidence pointed out by the committee which is prepresidential order record is sufficient to discard the petitioner's claim on merits. He would, therefore, strongly oppose even the request for remand.
8.
We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the papers.
9.
During the vigilance enquiry, contrary entries of the prepresidential order could be collected in the form of revenue record of the petitioner's ancestors. Pertinently, the petitioner in reply to the vigilance report has not denied that this record was of her paternal side ancestors. She merely tried to explain it by saying that it is only because of the illiteracy in the family that the contrary entries had appeared. Meaning thereby that the petitioner has not been disputing either the genuineness of such contrary record or had not denied that this is the record of her paternal side ancestors.
5 WP / 10826 / 2023 10.
This contrary school and revenue record collated by the vigilance officer and reflected in the impugned order, is as under:- School record :
Sr.
No.
Admission Date Bhurabai Sabru Birsing Cousin Grandmother Mathure Vanjari Admission Number Name of the student Relationship with the applicant Record of caste 12/06/1953 Agyansing Sabrusing Birsing Cousin Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 21/04/1955 Naik Jagannath Sabru Birsing Naik Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 11/07/1958 Magan Ramdhan Birsing Cousin Grandfather Mathure Vanjari 06/07/1961 Naik Motising Ramdhan Birasing Naik Cousin Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 01/07/1964 12 A Sandrabai Ramdhan Birsing Cousin Grandmother Ma. Va.
14/07/1964 Shantabai Ratansing Birsing Cousin Grandmother Ma. Vanjari 01/07/1965 Naik Banabai Ramdhan Birsing Naik Cousin Grandmother Ma. Vanjari 05/07/1966 190 A Naik Tarabai Sabru Birsing Naik Cousin Grandmother Ma. Banjari 15/07/1967 Naik Divalsing Ramdhan Birsing Na.
Cousin Grandfather Ma. Banjari 02/07/1968 Naik Guruprasad Sabru Birsingh Naik Cousin Grandfather Ma. Ba.
16/07/1968 Shantaram Sabru Sabru Birsing Cousin Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 09/07/1971 Shakuntala Atmaram Shakuntala Birsing Ramdhan Birsingh Cousin Grandmother Ma. Vanjari 10/07/1971 Revenue record :
Sr.
No.
Revenue Evidence Survey Name of Document Relationship with Record of Caste Revenue Record no.
holder applicant Birsa Chintaman Ma-Vanjari Great Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1938-39 Revenue Record Birsa Chintaman ma.
Vanjari Great Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1938-39 Revenue Record -- Kanhu Chandu Ma - Vanjari -- -- 1938-39 Unghya Pema Sardar Pema, Ramchandra Ganu Ma. Vanjari Charmya Pema, Sardar Pema Agyan Jyotising, Atmaram Sarup Sing Atmaram (Ma.Va.) Revenue Record Birsa Chintaman Ma-Vanjari Great Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1938-39 Revenue Record 2/2 1) Birsa Chintaman Ma- Vanjari 2) Kanhu Chandu Ma. Vanjari Great Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1940-41
6 WP / 10826 / 2023 3) Budha Pema, Chramya Pema, Sardar Pema Agyan 4) Ramchandra Ganu Ma.Va.
Revenue Record 4/1 Budha Pema, Charmya Pema, Sardar Pema Agyan Ma Vanjari -- -- 1940-41 Revenue Record Birsa Chintaman Ma-Vanjari Great Great Grandfather -- 1940-41 Revenue Record Birsa Chintaman Ma-Vanjari Great Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1940-41 Revenue Record Birsa Chintaman Ma-Vanjari Great Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1940-41 Revenue Record 37/1 Mangya Dalpat MaVanjari -- -- 1940-41 Revenue Record 8/1/A Sabru Birsa Ma-Vanjari Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1956-57 Revenue Record 8/2 Ramdas Rupa MaVanjari -- -- 1956-57 Revenue Record 2/1 Birsa Chintaman MaVanjari Great Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1956-57 Revenue Record --
1. Birsa Chintaman Ma.Ban.
2. Laxman Kanhu Ma.Banjari
3. Amrambakas Kanhu Ma.Van.
4.Charmya Pema Ma.Vanjari
5. Aanabh Mard Ramchandra Ma. Van.
Great Great Greatfather Ma. Vanjari 1956-57 Revenue Record Aatmaram Birasa Ma.Vanjari -- -- 1956-57 Revenue Record 15/1 Birasa Chintaman Ma.
Vanjari Great Grandfather 1956-57 Revenue Record 15/2 Ratansing Birsa Ma.Vanjari -- 1956-57 Revenue Record 16/3 Sabru Birsa Ma. Vanjari Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1956-57 Revenue Record 28/1 Badatsing Lalchand Ma.Vanjari -- 1956-57 Revenue Record Sabru Birsa Ma.Vanjari Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari 1956-57 Sr.
No.
Remark (Below Name) Sabru Birsa Vanjari Naik Great Grandfather Vanjari Naik Bhaidas Raising Vanjari -- Vanjari Sarup Sing Atmaram Vanjari -- Vanjari
6) Magan Sing Ramdhan
7) Motising Ramdhan
8) Bapu Ramdhan Vanjari
9) Chhaganlal Atmaram
10) Tara Sing Atmaram Vanjari Serial number Sub division Name of document holder Relationship with the applicant -- Vanjari Ratan Sing Birsa Vanjari Ghoti -- Vanjari Ghoti 2(A) Bibha Pralap Vanjari -- Vanjari -- Hardas Dawlat Vanjari Vanjari
7 WP / 10826 / 2023 Birsa Chintaman Ma-Vanjari Great Great Grandfather Ma. Vanjari -- --
1) Bhika Charmu, Tukaram Charmu, Sakharam Charmu Gangabai Charmu Mangalabai Charmu Ma. Vanjari
2) Shantabai Vanjari
3) Gopabai W/o Dhansing Vanjari -- Ma.Vanjari and Vanjari -- -- Anabhi Mard Ramchandra Man.Ban.
-- Man.Ban.
-- Birsa Chintaman Vanjari Naik Great Great Grandfather Vanjari Naik -- Ramdhan Birsa Vanjari Naik -- Vanjari Naik Motising Ramdhan Ramdhan Birsing Vanjari Naik -- Vanjari Naik -- Sabru Birsa Vanjari Naik Great Grandfather Vanjari Naik 11.
This school and the revenue record of the petitioner's ancestors is sufficient to demonstrate that all these entries are "Ma. Vanjari", "Vanjari Naik" and "Ma Banjari" and inconsistent with the petitioner's claim of belonging to Naikda scheduled tribe. 12.
As against this, favourable record wherein the petitioner and her blood relations have been described as Naikda in the school record are of recent origin, between the years 1981 and 2020. 13.
True it is that there are three records; one in respect of birth record of Sabru Birsai Naikda stated to be petitioner's great grandfather wherein, in the year 1952, he was described as Naikda and two revenue records of Sabru and one Gangubai of the year 1966 wherein also they have been described as Naikda. However, if one follows the principle laid down in the matter of Anand Dhananjay Nalawade Vs. State of Maharashtra; 2014 (4) Mh.L.J. 77, the consistent contrary entries of the period prior to 1952 pointed out
8 WP / 10826 / 2023 herein-above are for the period between 1928 to 1952 and would have a greater probative value.
14.
Consequently, we find no error in the conclusion arrived at by the committee based on such enormous contrary record. The observations and the conclusions are clearly plausible one and by no stretch of imagination can be branded as perverse or arbitrary. 15.
This leaves us with the attempt of the petitioner to derive the benefit of the validity possessed by one Prakash Kartarsing Ghoti. No explanation is coming forth and sought to be assigned as to why the petitioner could not demonstrate such a validity possessed by him for deriving its benefit. A lame excuse has been given in the petition in a vague manner saying that due to lack of information, she could not do so. If he is a person from her blood relation and when it is a matter of social status, one cannot appreciate the reasoning that for want of knowledge of his validity, she could not produce it. 16.
Besides, the petitioner is trying to demonstrate her relation with Prakash by relying upon his affidavit filed in the petition together with the genealogy which reads as under :-
9 WP / 10826 / 2023 Gangaram Naikda Chitaman Gangaram Narchod Gangaram (1948 Revenue Record) (1948 Revenue Record) Laxman Birsing Chintamani (1357 Fasli) Sangati Chitaman (1924 Kotwar Book) Sabdal Sangati (1948 Revenue Record) Kartarsing Pratapsing Jawansing Narayan Prakash (V.Holder) Dinesh Parasram Laxman Ramchandra Parasram Sabaru Ramdhan Ratansing Birsing (1955 Revenue Record) Shantabai Magan Banabai Motising Jagannath Guruprasad Shantaram Agyansing Jintendra Ramshankar Babita Sunandabai Vaishnavi Tanmay (Applicant) (Cousin Niece)
10 WP / 10826 / 2023 17.
However, as has been rightly pointed out by Mr. Yawalkar, in the vigilance enquiry, in his own matter, Prakash had expressly stated that his great grandfather Sangati Chintaman Dhoti did not have a real brother or sister.
18.
Pertinently, even the genealogy prepared in that enquiry under his signature demonstrates that his great grandfather Sangati was the loan child of Chintaman Gangaram. The petitioner claims to be the great great granddaughter of one Birsing stated to be another son of Chintaman. The affidavit of Prakash is conspicuously silent and does not seek to offer any explanation regarding such genealogy and his statement that his great grandfather Sangati was the lone child of his father - Chintamani. Even his affidavit is silent and does not make any attempt to substantiate the petitioner's version that for want of her knowledge she could not rely upon his validity. 19.
In view of such state of affairs, even we are not inclined to concede to the request of the petitioner's learned advocate for remand. 20.
We are of firm view that this course being sought by the petitioner is nothing but an abuse of the process and an attempt at manipulation.
21.
Besides, even if for the sake of arguments it is assumed that the validity holder - Prakash is a blood relation of the petitioner
11 WP / 10826 / 2023 from the paternal side, still, in the teeth of the voluminous contrary record which has a greater probative value as discussed herein-above, in our considered view, on merits the petitioner's claim is liable to be dismissed as has been done by the scrutiny committee. 22.
The writ petition is dismissed.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ] JUDGE JUDGE arp/