W.P. No.11850/2025 :: 1 :: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.11850 OF 2025 Sakshi Pandurang Mantalwad … PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & ors. … RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. A.D. Sonkawade, advocate holding for Mr. S.G. Jayewar, Advocate for petitioner Mr. A.A.A. Khan, A.G.P. for respondents ....… CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT AND ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 8th OCTOBER, 2025 O R D E R : The petitioner claims to have belonged to “Koli Mahadev (29)”, Scheduled Tribe. His tribe certificate has been invalidated by the respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee. He is, therefore, before us. 2. The learned Advocate for the petitioner would rely 2025:BHC-AUG:28364-DB W.P. No.11850/2025 :: 2 :: on the school entry of his cousin uncle Ganpati. The entry is of the year 1963, wherein his caste has been described as “Koli Mahadev”. He also relies on the validity certificate granted in favour of Ganpati himself. According to him, the subsequent contra entry must yield to the entry which is first in point of time, indicating the petitioner’s forefathers to have belonged to “Koli Mahadev”, Scheduled Tribe. He, therefore, urged for allowing the Writ Petition. 3. The learned A.G.P. would, on the other hand, submit that, the entry relied on by the petitioner, if looked with open eyes, would indicate some interpolations or additions therein. According to him, the surname and caste of Ganpati shown in those columns are faint. According to him, therefore, there is reason to believe the same to have been introduced later on. He would further rely on the school record of the father of the petitioner, wherein his caste has been shown as “Koli”. According to him, the word “Mahadev” has been introduced later on. The Vigilance Cell report reinforces the same. According to him, the Scrutiny Committee has rightly appreciated the material before it and refused to grant the W.P. No.11850/2025 :: 3 :: validation. He reiterated the reasons given by the Scrutiny Committee in support of the order impugned herein. 4. We have considered the submissions advanced. The petitioner’s cousin uncle Ganpati has been granted validity certificate, though conditional. It is true, in the school record of the petitioner’s father, the word “Mahadev” is said to have been introduced later on. So is the observation of the Vigilance Cell. We have also perused the said entry. The said entry is post 1970. On the other hand, the entry of Ganpati in the school record is dated 22/6/1963, wherein he is shown to have belonged to “Koli Mahadev” community. It is true that, the word with the surname “Mantalwar” are appearing faint. However, we have closely scrutinised the said entry to find the same to have neither made later on nor was it introduced after erasing any other entry in that place. The two dots, which reflect at the entry, is a reflection of the original dots appearing overleaf. Had those words been introduced later on, then those columns at the time of entry would have been blank. The same could not be presumed because all the entries have been made as and when the admissions in the school took W.P. No.11850/2025 :: 4 :: place. There was no reason to keep those columns blank and fill later on so as to suit the claim of the petitioner. In any case, the case of Ganpati has now been reopened. In the reopened proceedings, if he fails, the petitioner would meet the same fate. It is made clear that, in the reopened proceedings, the Scrutiny Committee shall not be influenced by our observations as regards the school entry of 1963, since the petitioner’s cousin uncle holds the validity certificate, we are inclined to grant the petitioner conditional validity. Hence the order : O R D E R (i) The Writ Petition is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 25/9/2025 passed by the respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee is hereby set aside. (iii) The respondent No.2 Scrutiny Committee is directed to immediately issue caste validity certificate in favour of the petitioner of belonging to ““Koli Mahadev (29)”, Scheduled Tribe. (iv) The validity shall be subject to the final outcome of the W.P. No.11850/2025 :: 5 :: matter of the petitioner’s cousin uncle Ganpati, which the Committee has decided to re-open. (v) The petitioner shall not be entitled to claim equities. (ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) (R.G. AVACHAT, J.) fmp/-