Allowed

Shubham Hari Hiwale v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC9 Feb 2022WP/1019/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court at Aurangabad invalidated aside from granting Koli Malhar Scheduled Tribe validity certificate to the petitioner. This despite discrepancies by the petitioner relies on a judgment by the Division Bench. The petitioner cites it's a high court bench. The court considered two vigilance reports and one certain interpolation. The court ordered the committee to issu

What did the court decide?

The Committee shall issue the validity certificate to the petitioner of Koli Malhar Scheduled Tribe subject to the decision taken by the Committee in the proceedings reopened of the validity holders r

Shubham Hari Hiwale Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

974-WP-1019-22.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

974 WRIT PETITION NO. 1019 OF 2022

¶5

SHUBHAM HARI HIWALE

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶8

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar Addl. GP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 : Mr. P.S. Patil Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr. M.D. Narwadkar

¶9

… CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND S. G. DIGE, JJ. DATE : 9^th FEBRUARY, 2022

¶10

PER COURT :-

¶11

The tribe claim of the petitioner as belonging to ‘Koli Malhar’ Scheduled Tribe is invalidated.

¶12

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that father of the petitioner, namely, Hari Hiwale is issued with validity certificate of ‘Koli Malhar’ Scheduled Tribe and paternal uncle of the petitioner, namely, Bhikan S/o Pandurang is also issued with validity certificate as ‘Koli Malhar’ Scheduled Tribe, after conducting vigilance. Another paternal uncle of the petitioner, namely, Laxman Pandurang is also issued with validity certificate of ‘Koli Malhar’ scheduled tribe. All the documents which the Committee has found to be interpolated and relied by the petitioner in the present matter, were the subject matter for consideration in cases of father and paternal uncles of the petitioner. The vigilance did not find any interpolation when report is submitted by the Vigilance Cell Officer in the cases of father and uncles of the petitioner. Old mortgage deed of the year 1937 is placed on record along with its translation. In the vigilance report, the record in respect of

¶13

¶14

974-WP-1019-22.odt

¶15

the grandfather of the petitioner shows the caste as ‘Koli Malhar’, therefore, according to learned Advocate, the petitioner deserves to be granted validity. The learned counsel for petitioner relies on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale Versus Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee and others reported in 2010 (6) Mh.L.J. 401.

¶16

The learned AGP submits that the Vigilance Cell has coloured photo copies of the record of paternal relatives of the petitioner, namely, father, paternal Aunt and paternal uncle . In the school record of these paternal relatives, the entry is either ‘Magas’ or ‘Koli’, subsequently the said entries are interpolated as ‘Koli Malhar’. The same can be viewed from the Photo copies collected during the vigilance, which were placed on record. In the said documents, there appears to be interpolation. The mortgage deed, which is relied on in the case of the father of the petitioner is not produced by the petitioner. The father of the petitioner gave statement that he does not know where is the original and how he could get the photo copy of the same.

¶17

We have considered the submissions. We have also gone through the vigilance report in cases of the father of the petitioner and paternal uncle of the petitioner Bhikan. The entries in the present vigilance report found to be interpolated, were also subject matter for consideration in the earlier proceedings while granting validities to the paternal relatives. The vigilance report in the cases of uncle of the petitioner and father of the petitioner do not observe the entries are interpolated. There are two vigilance reports. The same are contrary to each other.

¶18

The photocopies which are placed on record in the present matter depict some kind of interpolation, but it does not show at what point of

¶19

¶20

974-WP-1019-22.odt

¶21

time the same were interpolated, however, the fact remains that when vigilance was conducted in the cases of the uncle and father of the petitioner, the Vigilance did not find interpolation and found entries to be ‘Koli Malhar’.

¶22

Considering the above and relying upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Apoorva (Supra), we pass the following order.

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(i) The Committee shall issue the validity certificate to the petitioner of ‘Koli Malhar’, Scheduled Tribe.

¶25

(ii) The said validity shall be subject to the decision that would be taken by the Committee in the proceedings reopened of the validity holders relied by the petitioner.

¶26

Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶27

( S.G. DIGE ) ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE

¶28

mtk

Shubham Hari Hiwale v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shubham Hari Hiwale v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shubham Ashok Bodhankar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Pathan Razzak Dulekhan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Dnyaneshwar Sudhakar Pittalwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Talettutayi Solar Projects Four Private Limited through Its Authorized Signatory Vs the Tehsildar and Others

Dr N P Hirani Bahuuddeshiya Shikshan Sanstha through Its President Ayyub Khan Basheer Khan Vs Vandana Krushna the Secretary State of Maharashtra School Education and Sports Department and Anr.

Shivleela Sakharam Boyane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others