901-WP-18335-2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 18335 OF 2024 Pratyush s/o Ravindra Sawant, Age : 20 years, Occ. : Student, R/o At & Post- Dhaval, Taluka : Phaltan, District : Satara. ...Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Department of Tribal Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai- 32. Through its Secretary. 2. The Scheduled Tribe Certiicate Scrutiny Committee, Pune Division, 5th Floor, C-Wing, Kapil Towers, Near RTO Oice, Pune. Through its Member Secretary. ...Respondents. —————— Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam with Mr. Rushikesh S. Desai, for the Petitioner. Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for the Respondents-State. —————— Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh & Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ. Date : August 27, 2026. P. C. : 1. By consent of both the sides, heard inally at the admission stage. 2. This Writ Petition is directed against the order dated 3rd October 2024 passed by the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee invalidating the Tribe Claim of the Petitioner towards 'Koli Mahadev' in File No. Satara/246/2023. Gaikwad RD 1 of 8 901-WP-18335-2024.doc 3. The Petitioner is the student. On the earlier occasion, he had iled Writ Petition No.9272 of 2022 for directions to the Competent Authority to issue the Tribe Certiicate to the Petitioner as belonging to 'Koli Mahadev' Scheduled Tribe. Pursuant to the order dated 4th August 2022, the directions were issued to the Competent Authority and accordingly, the Petitioner received the Tribe Certiicate as belonging to 'Koli Mahadev' Scheduled Tribe. 4. The Petitioner's claim towards 'Koli Mahadev' was referred to the Respondent No.2-Committee on the earlier occasion. The Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee by order dated 29th August 2023 invalidated the Petitioner's claim towards 'Koli Mahadev' Scheduled Tribe. The Petitioner had iled Writ Petition No.12475 of 2023, which came to be allowed by order dated 8th January 2024 setting aside the order of invalidation and the Petitioner's claim was remanded back to the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration and decision. 5. The Respondent No.2-Committee referred the Petitioner's case to the Vigilance Cell for inquiry. The Vigilance Cell submitted its report. The copy of the Vigilance Cell Report was given to the Petitioner and the Petitioner submitted his reply to the same. The Respondent No.2- Committee, by the impugned order, invalidated the Petitioner's claim towards the 'Koli Mahadev' Scheduled Tribe. Gaikwad RD 2 of 8 901-WP-18335-2024.doc 6. It is submitted by learned Advocate for the Petitioner that, though the documents from the pre-constitution era in respect of his grandfather and cousin grandfather were submitted before the Committee showing their caste as 'Koli Mahadev', the Respondent No.2- Committee invalidated the claim on the basis of the documents collected by the Vigilance Cell. On the earlier occasion, the Vigilance Cell did not notice any tampering with the old school records of the Petitioner's grandfather, however, after the matter was remanded back to the Committee, the Vigilance Cell found tampering in the column of ‘Caste’ of the Petitioner's grandfather and cousin grandfather. The impugned order passed by Respondent No.2-Committee, whereby the pre-Constitution-era documents pertaining to the Petitioner's blood relatives have been ignored, is erroneous and unsustainable in law. The said order, therefore, deserves to be quashed and set aside. 7. It is submitted by learned AGP appearing for the Respondents including the Respondent No.2-Committee that, the Petitioner relied on the entries in the school record of his grandfather and cousin grandfather, which were found to be interpolated in the Vigilance enquiry. The earlier entries in respect of the Petitioner's grandfather, cousin grandfather and blood relatives in the Tahsil records are that of 'Koli' caste. The said entries being the oldest one, have more probative value. The Respondent No.2-Committee has rightly considered the Gaikwad RD 3 of 8 901-WP-18335-2024.doc material before it and rightly rejected the Petitioner's Tribe Claim and no interference was called for in the impugned order. 8. We have perused the record submitted by the learned AGP received from the Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee. The genealogy submitted by the Petitioner's father in the prescribed format to the committee is reproduced below : 9. There is no dispute in respect of the aforesaid genealogy. In support of his tribe claim, the petitioner submitted the following documents: Gaikwad RD 4 of 8 901-WP-18335-2024.doc 10. The aforesaid chart shows that, the earliest entries from the school record were that of the grandfather, cousin grandfather and cousin grandmother. The impugned order goes to show that, the Vigilance Cell conducted the inquiry with the said Zilla Parishad School at Dhaval, Taluka Phaltan, District Satara in respect of the said entries and it found that, the said entries in respect of the caste were interpolated and 'Hindu Mahadev Koli' was written. The copies of the said school extract are there in the record. 11. A close scrutiny of the said entries in respect of the grandfather, cousin grandfather and cousin grandmother of the Petitioner goes to indicate that, in the column ‘Caste’ and ‘Sub-caste’, the irst word written is ‘Hindu’, and thereafter it is written ‘Mahadev’ and thereafter it is written ‘Koli’. Considering the said entries, the observation by the Scrutiny Committee that, the same is interpolated or there is insertion of the word ‘Mahadev’ cannot be discarded. The said observation by Gaikwad RD 5 of 8 901-WP-18335-2024.doc Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee appears to be based on the Vigilance Cell Report. The close scrutiny of the said entry from the record shows that, the observation of the Respondent No. 2-Scrutiny Committee cannot be said to be baseless. It is true that, on the earlier occasion the said was not the inding of the Respondent No. 2-Scrutiny Committee, however, on re-inquiry, the Vigilance Cell found the aforesaid aspect in the school record of the grandfather, cousin grandfather and cousin grandmother of the Petitioner. 12. Even for the sake of argument, the contention of the Petitioner that, there is no insertion of word ‘Mahadev’ in the school record of grandfather, cousin grandfather and cousin grandmother in respect of their caste entries, is accepted, the Vigilance Cell found the entries in the revenue records of Tahsil Oice Khandala, Taluka Khandala, District Satara in respect of the birth entries of the grandfather, cousin grandfather, cousin grandmother and other blood relatives of the Petitioner. The said entries are much prior to the entries in the school record of the Petitioner’s grandfather, cousin grandfather and cousin grandmother. The said school record is of the year 1943, whereas the entries in the revenue records are of earlier period between 1882 and 1944. The entries found in the revenue records in respect of the grandfather, cousin grandfather and other blood relatives of the Petitioner are reproduced below : Gaikwad RD 6 of 8 901-WP-18335-2024.doc 13. The impugned order further shows that, the Vigilance Cell found the entriy in respect of death of the cousin great grandfather of the Petitioner namely ‘Pandu bin Sakharam Koli’, wherein his caste is mentioned as ‘Koli’ and the said entry is of 21st November 1811. The aforesaid chart, which is based on the revenue records, the copies of which are kept in the record, goes to show that, the caste of the Petitioner's blood relatives, i.e. grandfather and cousin grandfather mentioned in the oldest record is recorded as ‘Koli’. The said revenue entries, being prior in point of time to the aforesaid entries in the school records of the Petitioner's grandfather and cousin grandfather, would undisputedly carry greater probative value. 14. On the basis of the aforesaid material on record, the Respondent No. 2-Scrutiny Committee invalidated the Tribe Claim of the Petitioner. The observations and the decision of the Respondent No. 2-Scrutiny Committee is based on the documents collected during Vigilance Cell enquiry and no fault can be found with the same. In the backdrop of the Gaikwad RD 7 of 8 901-WP-18335-2024.doc above discussion, no fault can be found with the impugned order passed by Respondent No.2-Scrutiny Committee invalidating the Petitioner's claim towards the 'Mahadev Koli' Scheduled Tribe. The petition fails and the same is liable to be dismissed. Hence the following order: ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is dismissed. (ii) The record be returned to the respondent no. 2 Scrutiny Committee. [Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.] Gaikwad RD 8 of 8 RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Digitally signed by RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date: 2026.08.27 20:34:43 +0530