Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ku. Sakshi d/o Shashikant Bhagwatkar, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) challenging an order dated 07.06.2018 passed by the District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Wardha (Respondent No. 2), which invalidated her claim of belonging to the 'Saitwal' caste (Jain religion), classified as an Other Backward Class (OBC) under Government Resolution dated 01.03.2006 (Sr. No. 6 against 'Shimpi'). The petitioner had submitted various documents including a school register entry from 1951 showing one Madhukar Keshavrao Bhagwatkar as belonging to 'Saitwal' caste, a family tree, and a caste validity certificate of her uncle Shashikant Bhagwatkar. The Committee's order was based on a fractured opinion: one member found the documents sufficient, while the Chairman and Secretary (majority) held that the relationship with Madhukar Keshavrao Bhagwatkar was not established and that there were insufficient documents. The Court examined the record and found that the majority opinion had not properly considered the second family tree (which included Madhukar Keshavrao Bhagwatkar) and the caste validity certificate of the uncle. The Court held that the Committee ought to have considered all documents together and that the rejection was not sustainable. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration, directing the petitioner to appear before the Committee on a specified date. The petition was allowed in these terms.
Headnote
A) Caste Certificate - Scrutiny Committee - Fractured Opinion - The Committee's order invalidating caste claim was based on a fractured opinion where one member found sufficient documents while Chairman and Secretary disagreed - Court held that the majority opinion failed to properly consider documents such as school register entry of Madhukar Keshavrao Bhagwatkar (1951) and caste validity certificate of petitioner's uncle - Matter remanded for fresh consideration (Paras 2-7). B) Evidence - Family Tree - The petitioner filed two family trees; the first did not mention Madhukar Keshavrao Bhagwatkar, but the second did - The Committee rejected the school register entry on ground of relationship not established, but the Court noted that the second family tree was not denied and the caste validity certificate of the uncle (Shashikant Bhagwatkar) was also on record - Held that the Committee ought to have considered these documents together (Paras 3-6). C) Other Backward Classes - Inclusion of Caste - Government Resolution dated 01.03.2006 includes caste 'Saitwal' of Jain religion in the list of Other Backward Classes at Sr. No. 6 against the entry of 'Shimpi' - The petitioner's claim was based on this resolution (Para 2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned order of the Caste Scrutiny Committee invalidating the petitioner's caste claim as belonging to 'Saitwal' (Jain) (Other Backward Class) is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 07.06.2018 passed by the District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Wardha is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Committee for fresh consideration. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Committee on 25.03.2019. The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
Law Points
- Caste Scrutiny Committee must consider all relevant documents
- including school records and caste validity certificates of relatives
- and cannot reject claim solely on ground of relationship not established without considering family tree
- fractured opinion of committee requires careful evaluation
- Government Resolution dated 01.03.2006 includes caste 'Saitwal' of Jain religion in OBC list at Sr. No. 6 against entry of 'Shimpi'.
