Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Nitin Dnyaneshwar Sherkar, through his natural guardian father, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 28.6.2004 passed by the Scheduled Tribes Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati, which invalidated his caste certificate dated 1.9.1998 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Achalpur, declaring him as belonging to 'Halbi' Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner sought a declaration that he belongs to Halbi tribe, which is recognized as Scheduled Tribe at Sr.No.19 in the Constitutional Order, 1950 for Maharashtra. The facts reveal that the petitioner passed his 12th standard examination in June 2004 and wanted to apply for admission to medical course from the Scheduled Tribes category. He submitted his caste certificate along with 22 documents to the Committee through his college. The Committee issued a show cause notice along with a police vigilance report dated 2.6.2004, which indicated that the petitioner's family had migrated from Madhya Pradesh and did not belong to Halbi tribe. The Committee, after considering the documents and the vigilance report, invalidated the certificate. The petitioner argued that his family and ancestors hailed from Achalpur city, which is a border area of Melghat, identified as area occupied by Halbi even prior to removal of area restriction in 1976. However, the Court found that the petitioner failed to produce any documentary evidence to show that his ancestors were from Melghat area or that they were Halbi by caste. The Court held that the burden of proof lies on the claimant to establish his Scheduled Tribe status, and the petitioner did not discharge that burden. The Court dismissed the petition, upholding the Committee's order.
Headnote
A) Scheduled Tribes - Caste Certificate - Validity - Burden of Proof - The burden lies on the claimant to prove that he belongs to a Scheduled Tribe by producing cogent documentary evidence. The Scrutiny Committee's order invalidating the certificate was upheld as the petitioner failed to prove his ancestors were from the notified area of Melghat and that he belongs to Halbi tribe. (Paras 1-10) B) Scheduled Tribes - Area Restriction - Constitutional (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 - The Scheduled Tribes Order originally had area restrictions which were removed in 1976. However, the petitioner must still show that his ancestors were from the area where the tribe was originally notified. The petitioner's ancestors were from Achalpur, which was not part of the notified area for Halbi tribe. (Paras 2-5) C) Evidence - Documentary Evidence - Caste Claim - The petitioner submitted 22 documents, but none proved that his ancestors were from Melghat area or that they were Halbi by caste. The vigilance report indicated that the petitioner's family had migrated from Madhya Pradesh and did not belong to Halbi tribe. (Paras 3-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner belongs to 'Halbi' Scheduled Tribe and whether the caste certificate dated 1.9.1998 is valid.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The order dated 28.6.2004 passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee is upheld.
Law Points
- Burden of proof on claimant to establish Scheduled Tribe status
- Area restriction under Scheduled Tribes Order
- 1950
- Validity of caste certificate
- Scrutiny Committee's powers
