Vishakha Dattarao Sakharwad vs. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Vishakha d/o Dattarao Sakharwad and Ganpat s/o Kachruba Sakharwad, challenged a common judgment and order dated March 19, 2025, passed by the Scrutiny Committee (Respondent No. 4). This order invalidated their claims of belonging to the "Mannervarlu" Scheduled Tribe. The petitioners argued that their distant blood relatives, Siddhant Sakharwad and Samarth Sakharwad, had previously challenged a similar invalidation order in Writ Petition No. 11596 of 2023 before this Court. That petition was partly allowed, granting conditional validities. The petitioners contended that their genealogy established their relationship with these validity holders and thus they should also be granted conditional validities. The State, represented by the AGP, argued that the Scrutiny Committee had found contra entries indicating the petitioners did not belong to the "Mannervarlu" Scheduled Tribe, as old documents pertained to the "Manner" caste. Therefore, the State argued, the petitioners failed to establish their relationship with validity holders and substantiate their tribe claim.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petitions and quashed and set aside the impugned order dated March 19, 2025, passed by the Scrutiny Committee. The Court directed the Scrutiny Committee to issue validity certificates to the petitioners for belonging to the "Mannervarlu" Scheduled Tribe. The Court further stipulated that the validity granted to the petitioners would be co-terminus with the validity certificates of their blood relatives whose tribe claims are proposed to be reopened. The Court reasoned that the relationship of the petitioners with the validity holders in the previously decided Writ Petition No. 11596 of 2023 was not in dispute. The Court also noted that in the previous case, this Court had considered old documents from 1954 and 1956 of forefathers showing their belonging to the "Mannervarlu" Scheduled Tribe. Following the same course, the Court granted the relief.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to conditional validity certificates for belonging to the "Mannervarlu" Scheduled Tribe, given that their distant blood relatives were granted conditional validities by this Court in a previous writ petition? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners argued that their relationship with the validity holders in Writ Petition No. 11596 of 2023 is undisputed, as depicted in the genealogy submitted. They relied on the precedent set by this Court in allowing the previous petition, albeit with conditions, and therefore urged that they too deserve conditional validities. Revenue/State's Argument: The State contended that the Scrutiny Committee correctly invalidated the tribe claims based on contra entries in old documents suggesting the caste was "Manner" and not "Mannervarlu". The State argued that the petitioners failed to establish their relationship with validity holders and to substantiate their claim to the "Mannervarlu" Scheduled Tribe, thus disentitling them to even conditional validities.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Oral Judgment (Per Abasaheb D. Shinde, J.) :
Heard.
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With consent of the rival parties, writ petitions are taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission.
By these writ petitions, the petitioners, who are niece and uncle respectively, are challenging the common judgment and order dated 19.03.2025 passed by respondent / Scrutiny Committee by which tribe claims of the petitioners of belonging to “Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe, have been invalidated.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the distant blood relatives namely Siddhant Sakharwad and Samarth Sakharwad of the petitioners, whose tribe claims were invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee, have challenged the said order before this Court by filing Writ Petition No.11596 of 2023 and this Court has allowed the said petition
(3) 966 WP-4275.2025 + 1.odt partly by granting conditional validities to those petitioners subject to proposed reopening of the validities on the basis of which those petitioners have been granted conditional validities. He also submits that the genealogy filed before the Scrutiny Committee depicts the relationship of the petitioners with those validity holders and there is no dispute about the relationship. He, therefore, urged that the petitioners deserve to be granted conditional validities.
Per contra, learned A.G.P. submits that the Scrutiny Committee, after considering the fact that there are certain contra entries showing that the petitioners do not belong to “Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe as the old documents pertains to “Manner” caste, has invalidated the tribe claim of the petitioners. He, therefore, submits that since the petitioners have failed to establish their relationship with the validity holders as well as to substantiate that the petitioners belong to “Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe, they are not entitled for issuance of even conditional validities.
After having considered rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned AGP, we find that one Gangadhar Kishanrao Sakharwad is the original validity holder whose validity has been relied upon by this Court while granting conditional validities to the distant blood
(4) 966 WP-4275.2025 + 1.odt relatives of the petitioners. This Court has also considered oldest documents of 1954 as well as 1956 of the forefathers showing that the petitioners therein belonged to “Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe. We therefore find that since relationship of the petitioners with those validity holders in Writ Petition No. 11596 of 2023 is not in dispute, we follow the same course and pass the following order. ORDER (i) The writ petitions are allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 19.03.2025 passed by respondent No.4/Scrutiny Committee is hereby quashed and set aside. (iii) Respondent/Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue validity certificates to the petitioners of belonging to “Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe. (iv) The validity granted in favour of the petitioners will be co-terminus with the validity certificates of the blood relatives of the petitioners, whose tribe claims are proposed to be reopened. (ABASAHEB D. SHINDE) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) JUDGE JUDGE VD_Dhirde
Reproduced from the public record of the Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.