Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Suresh Kumar Balkrishna Naidu, challenged the order dated 19-12-2016 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati Division, Amravati, which invalidated his claim for 'Mannewar' Scheduled Tribe, an entry at Serial No.18 in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. The petitioner had filed twenty-seven documents before the Committee, and the Police Vigilance Cell secured six documents relating to his blood relatives. The Committee rejected the claim primarily because in the birth extract of the petitioner's grandfather (dated 25-5-1928) the caste was not mentioned; in the admission extract of his real uncle Laxminarayan Rajaiyya (dated 9-7-1929) the caste was mentioned as 'Telgu Mannewar'; and in the school leaving certificate of another uncle Suryaprakash V. Rajaiyya (dated 13-7-1936) the caste was mentioned as 'Mannewaram'. Some documents also referred to the caste as 'Naidu', 'Telgu', or 'Telangi'. The High Court found that the entry 'Telgu Mannewar' merely indicates the language (Telugu) and not a different caste, and 'Mannewaram' is not a separate tribe or sub-tribe but a variant spelling of 'Mannewar'. The court also noted that the petitioner's real brother Raghavendra Balkisan had a school leaving certificate dated 21-7-1959 showing his caste as 'Mannewar', and there were several other post-1950 entries indicating the caste of blood relatives as 'Mannewar'. The court held that the Committee was not justified in rejecting the claim and allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned order.
Headnote
A) Scheduled Tribes - Caste Certificate - Validity - Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, Entry No.18 - The Scrutiny Committee invalidated the petitioner's claim for 'Mannewar' Scheduled Tribe on the ground that in some old documents the caste was mentioned as 'Telgu Mannewar' or 'Mannewaram'. The High Court held that the prefix 'Telgu' indicates language, not caste, and 'Mannewaram' is not a separate tribe but a variant of 'Mannewar'. The court also noted that the petitioner's brother's school leaving certificate of 1959 showed caste as 'Mannewar'. Held that the Committee erred in rejecting the claim (Paras 2-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee was justified in invalidating the petitioner's claim for 'Mannewar' Scheduled Tribe based on entries in old documents showing 'Telgu Mannewar' and 'Mannewaram'.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 19-12-2016 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati Division, Amravati, is set aside. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Interpretation of caste entries in old documents
- Validity of Scheduled Tribe certificate
- Consideration of pre-constitutional documents
- Weight to be given to entries of blood relatives
