Allowed

Shivleela Sakharam Boyane v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC9 Feb 2022WP/1098/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court invalidated the rejection of the petitioner's Scheduled Tribe claim. Relying on a previous judgment where similar challenged entries were later validated for a paternal relative, the Court ordered the Committee to issue a validity certificate for 'Koli Mahadev' ST. This is conditioned on the outcome of proceedings regarding the relative's validity.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the Committee to grant a validity certificate for 'Koli Mahadev, Scheduled Tribe' to the petitioner.

Shivleela Sakharam Boyane Vs the State of… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

980-WP-1098-22.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

980 WRIT PETITION NO. 1098 OF 2022

¶5

SHIVLEELA SAKHARAM BOYANE VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Omgashad B. Boinwad AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Mr. S.K. Tambe Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr. M.D. Narwadkar

¶8

… WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1469 OF 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1098 OF 2022

¶9

PARMESHWAR BHAGWAN KHOKLE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶10

Advocate for applicant : Mr. S.N. Lale Yelwatkar AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Mr. S.K. Tambe Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr. M.D. Narwadkar Advocate for Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Omgashad B. Boinwad

¶11

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND S. G. DIGE, JJ.

¶12

DATE : 9^th FEBRUARY, 2022

¶13

PER COURT :-

¶14

The tribe claim of the petitioner as ‘Koli Mahadev’ Scheduled Tribe is invalidated.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that paternal relative of the petitioner, namely, Somnath Boyane is issued with validity certificate. The contra entries, which the Committee considered in the present matter and the same are found to be interpolated, were the subject-matter of consideration, when the validity was issued to

¶16

¶17

980-WP-1098-22.odt

¶18

Somnath. When vigilance was conducted in that case, the Committee did not find those entries to be interpolated. After the vigilance, the validity was issued to Somnath. The learned counsel submits that vigilance has drawn genealogy, in which it is clear that Somnath is son of the real uncle of the petitioner’ father. The learned counsel relied upon the judgment 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.

¶19

The learned AGP submits that there are interpolation in the school record of father and uncle of the petitioner. The vigilance has found interpolation. The Committee has considered the said aspect. In addition, the petitioner has failed in the affinity test also.

¶20

It appears from the genealogy drawn by the Vigilance that Somnath to whom the validity certificate is issued, is the son of real uncle of the petitioner’s father. The Committee has found entries of caste recorded in the school record of Somnath, Gangaram, Ramdas and Rangnath to be interpolated. However, the vigilance was conducted in respect of these documents in the case of Somnath. There are two vigilance reports, which are contrary to each other. The show cause notice has been issued to Somnath.

¶21

Considering the judgment in the case of Apoorva (supra) and the entries which Committee considered to be interpolated, were also subject matter for consideration when validity was issued to Somnath, we pass the following order.

¶22

ORDER

¶23

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

¶24

¶25

980-WP-1098-22.odt

¶26

(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.

¶27

Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶28

In view of disposal of writ petition, the Civil Application stands disposed of.

¶29

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

¶30

mtk

Shivleela Sakharam Boyane v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivleela Sakharam Boyane 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

Statutes considered

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

Shubham Hari Hiwale Vs the State of Maharashtra 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.