3)Law in this regard is already settled. In the case of Raju
Ramsing Vasave vs. Mahesh Deorao Bhivapurkar and others {(2008)
9 SCC 54}, the Apex Court has held very clearly that the Court does
not have jurisdiction to substitute any caste or tribe in the
Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and Constitution
(Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. In para 20 of the judgment, the
Supreme Court held that in terms of Article 342 of the Constitution
of India, the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 was issued
and in this Order, tribe “Halba” finds place, but the community
“Koshti” is not mentioned in the said Order. It further held that the
community “Koshti” in the State of Maharashtra comes under
“Special Backward Class” and the occupation of the members of this
community may be the same, but it is well settled that before a
person can obtain a declaration that he is a member of the Scheduled
Tribe, he must be a member of the tribe. For this proposition of law,
the Supreme Court referred to the case of Nityanand Sharma vs.
State of Bihar {(1996) 3 SCC 576}. For these reasons, the Supreme
Court has held that the Court does not have any jurisdiction so as to
enable it to substitute any caste or tribe. The relevant observations
of the Supreme Court as they appear in para 21 of the judgment are
reproduced as under :
