129 to 131.odt (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 12300 OF 2024 Girish Gangadhar Konkatwar VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others AND WRIT PETITION NO. 12313 OF 2024 Gayatri Gangadhar Konkatwar VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others AND WRIT PETITION NO. 12315 OF 2024 Amit Maroti Konkatwar VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others ... Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. A.D. Sonkawale h/f Mr. Jayewar Sainath Gangadhar AGP’s for respective Respondents/State : Mr. S.R. Yadav Lonikar, Mr. D.R. Korade ... CORAM : S.G. MEHARE & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 24, 2025 PER COURT : 1. Heard both sides. 2. The petitioners are paternal side blood relatives and they are challenging distinct judgments and orders passed by the Scrutiny Committee on 25.10.2024 invalidating their tribe certificates of Scheduled Tribe “Mannervarlu”. There is a common record, therefore, we propose to decide these petitions by a common order. 2025:BHC-AUG:5398-DB 129 to 131.odt (2) 3. The petitioners are relying on the validity certificate issued to Sahadev Ramlu Konkatwar, which is first in time. After conducting vigilance twice, he was issued with validity certificate by a reasoned order by the committee. Banking on his validity by a common judgment and order, blood relatives of the petitioners namely Radhika, Shruti, Vaishnavi, Akshay and Balaji were issued with the conditional validity by the Co-ordinate Bench (of which Justice Shailesh P. Brahme was a member) passed on 06.09.2024. On the ground of parity, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for issuing conditional validity. It is further submitted that the petitioners are ready to face the consequences as per Shweta Balaji Isankar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others, Writ Petition No.5611 of 2018. 4. Learned AGP supports the impugned judgment and order. He would submit that the validity issued to Sahadev is not reliable as it was issued banking on validities of the maternal side relatives. It is further submitted that tampering of the school record was noticed. Sahadev was issued with a show cause notice and reverification is underway. 5. We have gone through the genealogy. The petitioners are relying on the number of validities issued to blood relatives. The genealogy shows those validity holders. Sahadev was first in time. In his case, vigilance was conducted twice and thereafter, vide order 129 to 131.odt (3) dated 29.05.2007, the committee issued him the validity certificate by a reasoned order. His validity is still intact. 6. Relying on the validity of Sahadev, the Co-ordinate Bench by a reasoned order dated 06.09.2024 issued further validities to all persons namely Radhika, Shruti, Vaishnavi, Akshay and Balaji. It is also a matter of record that there was a common vigilance in case of Amit and Balaji, which was adopted by the petitioners. We have no iota of doubt that after considering the self-same record, the committee as well as the Co-ordinate Bench by a common order granted validities to the blood relatives. Unless those validities are revoked, the petitioners cannot be deprived of same social status. 7. We propose to adopt the same course and reasons assigned by the Co-ordinate Bench in its order dated 06.09.2024. The petitioners are ready to face the consequences as per Shweta Balaji Isankar. We find that the impugned judgments and orders are unsustainable and therefore, we pass the following order : ORDER (i) Writ Petitions are allowed partly. (ii) The impugned judgments and orders passed by the scrutiny committee are quashed and set aside. (iii) The respondent/scrutiny committee shall forthwith issue tribe validity certificate of Scheduled Tribe “Mannervarlu” to the 129 to 131.odt (4) petitioners, which shall be subject to the outcome of reverification proposed by the scrutiny committee. (iv) The petitioners shall not claim equities. (SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) (S.G. MEHARE, J.) Mujaheed//