2024:BHC-NAG:3191-DB

Judgment 1 12wp5172.21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 5172/2021

Yuvraj S/o Rajendra Pratap Singh Thakur,

Aged about 19 years, Occ. Student,
R/o. Asra, Taluka Bhatkuli, District Amravati

…. PETITIONER(S)

// VERSUS //

(1) District Caste Certificate Verification Committee ,

Amravati, Through its Chairman,

(2) Indian Institute of Technology,

Through its Principal, Madras,
Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600036

Amendment carried out as per

Court’s order dated 25/01/2022
…. RESPONDENT(S)

∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞
Ms. P. Kaware, Adv h/f Shri Dhengale, Adv for the Petitioner(s)
Shri N.R. Patil, AGP for the Respondent/State
∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞

CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR & SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, JJ.

MARCH 15, 2024

JUDGMENT :- (PER: SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)

..ANSARI..
 Judgment 2 12wp5172.21.odt

. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for the respective

parties at the stage of admission itself.

(2) By this Petition, the Petitioner is challenging the order passed by

the Respondent No. 1 - District Caste Certificate Verification

Committee, Amravati (hereinafter referred to as “the Scrutiny

Committee”) thereby invalidating the caste claim of the Petitioner as

‘Pardeshi’ (Other Backward Class).

(3) It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner has passed his 12 th

standard examination from Science Stream. He has passed JEE Advanced

Examination and his OBC rank is at Serial No. 3499. He has got

provisional admission in I.I.T., Madras on 26/11/2021. He has forwarded

his Application Form for verification of his caste claim of ‘Pardeshi’

through his school.

(4) It is contended by the Petitioner that the he has annexed certain

documents for verification of his caste as ‘Pardeshi’ with the Respondent

No. 1 – Scrutiny Committee, which are as follows:-

..ANSARI..
 Judgment 3 12wp5172.21.odt

“(a) Caste Certificate dated 17/10/2020 issued by the Sub-

Divisional Officer, Tivsa Bhatkuli;

(b) School Leaving Certificate dated 30/07/2020 issued by the

Principal, S.G. Mahila Junior College, Paratvada;

(c) School Leaving Certificate of his father Rajendra Pratap

Singh dated 12/03/1998;

(d) School Admission Register dated 19/01/1968 of Jugal

Kishor – Grandfather of the Petitioner;

(e) Extract of Birth Register/ Kothwal Book dated 27/05/1965

of Ratnakala - sister of Grandfather of the Petitioner;

(f) Extract from Record of Right dated 11/10/1961 regarding

purchase of land by Jageshwar in the name of his wife Punabai;

and

(g) Copy of Sale-Deed dated 25/03/1957 in the name of

Punabai W/o Jageshwar Pardeshi”

(5) It is contended by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that in

the Sale-Deed dated 25/03/1957, the caste is shown as ‘Pardeshi’ which

..ANSARI..
 Judgment 4 12wp5172.21.odt

is the oldest entry. He further contends that after rejection of the caste

claim of the Petitioner, the Petitioner has secured the School Leaving

Certificate of Manu i.e. sister of Grandfather of the Petitioner.

(6) On perusal of the documents, it appears that there are only two

documents i.e. the Sale-Deed which is prior to inclusion of caste

‘Pardeshi’ in OBC and the alleged document (Annexure-10) which was

not filed before the Scrutiny Committee.

(7) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that these two

documents i.e. the Sale-Deed dated 25/03/1957 and the School Leaving

Certificate of the sister of Grandfather of the Petitioner dated

13/07/1957 clearly go to show that the Petitioner belongs to caste

‘Pardeshi’.

(8) Learned AGP drawn our attention that there are discrepancies in

the evidence collected by the Vigilance Cell. It is submitted that at some

places, the relatives of the Petitioner were shown belonging to caste

‘Pardeshi (Kurmi)’. Even the caste of the Petitioner, while taking

admission in the school on 12/05/2012, was shown as ‘Pardeshi (Kurmi)’.

..ANSARI..
 Judgment 5 12wp5172.21.odt

The explanation given is that the ancestors of the Petitioner were termed

as ‘Pardeshi (Kurmi)’, however, their original caste is ‘Pardeshi’. The caste

of Grandfather of the Petitioner is shown as ‘Pardeshi (Thakur)’.

(9) We have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as the

learned AGP for the Respondent No. 1/State. Perused the Record and

Proceedings of the Committee.

(10) There is no satisfactory explanation as why his caste is shown as

‘Pardeshi (Thakur)’. The document at Annexure-10 i.e. School Leaving

Certificate of sister of Grandfather of the Petitioner, which is alleged to

be procured after the claim of the Petitioner was rejected, needs some

consideration.

(11) Insofar as the School Leaving Certificate in respect of Manu i.e.

sister of Grandfather of the Petitioner is concerned, it appears that the

same is dated 13/07/1957. Her date of birth is shown as 08/09/1951 and

it is shown that she belongs to caste ‘Pardeshi’. The caste ‘Pardeshi’ is

included in OBC at Serial No. 220 vide Notification dated 13/10/1967.

..ANSARI..
 Judgment 6 12wp5172.21.odt

(12) Following documents prior to issuance of Notification dated

13/10/1967 are placed on record by the Petitioner:-

Sr. Name Relation Document Date of Caste

No. Document
1 Ratnakala Sister of Register/ 27/05/1965 Pardeshi
Grandfather Kothwal
of the Book
Petitioner
2 Punabai Grandmother Record of 11/10/1961 Pardeshi
Jageshwar of the Right of
Pardeshi Petitioner purchase of
land
3 Punabai Grandmother Sale-Deed 25/03/1957 Pardeshi
of the
Petitioner
4 Manu Sister of School 13/07/1957 Pardeshi
Grandfather Leaving
of the Certificate
Petitioner
5 Ratnakala Sister of Kothwal 08/06/1965 Pardeshi
Grandfather Book/Birth
of the Register
Petitioner

(13) There is no dispute about family tree produced on record,

however, there is no name Manu of the daughter of Jageshwar Dhaniram.

(Annexure-10) pertains to School Leaving Certificate in respect of the

Manu Jageshwar who has taken admission on 13/07/1957 and her date

..ANSARI..
 Judgment 7 12wp5172.21.odt

of birth is shown as 08/09/1951. Her caste is shown as ‘Pardeshi’,

however, this document was not before the Respondent No. 1 – Scrutiny

Committee nor there was any enquiry by the Vigilance Cell. As such, it

would be appropriate to grant liberty to the Petitioner to file additional

affidavit explaining the relationship of Manu Jageshwar with the present

Petitioner.

(14) Considering the documents prior to the year 1967 and in view of

the documents procured after invalidation of the caste, it would be

appropriate to remand the matter back to the Respondent No. 1 –

Scrutiny Committee for further enquiry in the matter and to issue

appropriate orders in that regard.

(15) Hence, we proceed to pass following order:-

ORDER

(a) The Writ Petition is partly allowed.

(b) The matter is remanded back to the Respondent No. 1 –

Caste Scrutiny Committee to consider and decide the claim of the

..ANSARI..
 Judgment 8 12wp5172.21.odt

Petitioner afresh. The Petitioner is at liberty to file additional

affidavit before the Respondent No. 1 – Scrutiny Committee.

(c) The Petitioner to appear before the Respondent No. 1 –

Caste Scrutiny Committee on 30/03/2024.

The Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Pending

Application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

(SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.)

Signed by: A.P. ANSARI

..ANSARI..
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 15/03/2024 15:56:37