Sanjay Vasantrao Thakur v. State of Maharashtra

1. As directed by this Court (Coram: A.S.Oka and Riyaz Chagla, JJ) on 15th September 2017 Respondent No.2 - Caste Scrutiny Committee was directed to adjudicate on the question of relationship of the Petitioner - Sanjay Vasantrao Thakur with Vasant Budho Sonawane (his father) and relationship of Petitioner with Budho Lahanu Thakur (his grandfather). Pursuant to that order the Petitioner has appeared before the Committee and after conducting an enquiry the Committee has given a report dated 6th December 2017 addressed to the Registrial (Judicial-1).

2. Though the Petitioner tried to move this matter, for some reason or other, it could not be heard. On the last date we directed learned AGP to take instructions about submitting the report. Today, the learned AGP has submitted the said report. That is how we have heard learned Advocate Mendadkar for the Petitioner and learned AGP. With their assistance, we have gone through the said report. The contents of the report are as follows: (a) The Committee has handed over the enquiry to Vigilance Cell and Vigilance Cell gave a report dated 6th December 2017 to the Committee. (b) During Home enquiry the Vigilance Officer obtained family genealogy from the Petitioner.

(c) The findings of the enquiry are as follows:

(i) Vasant Budho Sonawane is found to be father of the

(ii) Budho Lahanu Thakur is found to be father of Vasant

(d) The report is annexed to the enquiry report submitted by the

(i) School Leaving Certificate of the Petitioner of the year

(ii) School Leaving Certificate of his father Vasant of the year 1957 describing his caste as Hindu Thakur.

(iii) School Leaving Certificate of Budho (Grandfather of the Petitioner) of the year 1918 mentioning the caste as Thakur. (e) During enquiry the Vigilance Cell has also collected various documents relating to the father, uncle, grandfather, cousin grandfather, great grandfather, cousin great grandfather (there are certain pre-constitutional documents) wherein, their caste is mentioned as Thakur. (f) The native place of the Petitioner is at Yawal, Dist. Jalgaon and the school record from the year 1918 to 1957 was verified wherein caste of his various relatives has been mentioned as Thakur. Even in birth and death register pertaining to the years 1916 to 1952 caste is mentioned as Thakur. Even in mutation register for the year 1932 to 1964 caste is mentioned as Thakur. 6th (g) Even though the surname of the Vasant Budho is mentioned as Sonawane, he and Budho Lahanu Thakur belong to the one and the same family.

3. After going through the said report, the learned AGP has submitted that matter be remanded to the Committee for fresh decision. We are not aggreable to the said submission.

4. The documents pertaining to pre-constitutional period has got high probative value. When earlier the Committee has repudiated the claim of the Petitioner vide the order dated 25th November 2002, the Petitioner could not point out his relationship with Budho Lahanu Thakur and Vasant Budho Sonawane. That is the reason why the matter was sent for limited enquiry. If the enquiry report is considered, we find that the same supports the caste claim of the writ Petitioner. Therefore, we are of the view that the Committee can be asked to consider the claim of the Petitioner for issuance of caste validity certificate as belonging to Thakur tribe.

5. In view of above, the following order is passed: ORDER

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

(ii) The order dated 25th November 2002 passed by the

Respodnent No.2 - Committee for scrutiny and verification of Tribe claims, Amravati Division is quashed and set aside. 6th