Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court dismissed two writ petitions filed by a brother and sister, Kishor Vishwanath Khartadkar and Shaila Subhash Jaunjale, challenging the invalidation of their claim to belong to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe by the Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Tribe Claims. The petitioners had secured employment in government and banking sectors based on their claimed tribal status. The court examined the evidence, including school records showing their caste as 'Thakur', a Vigilance Cell report that concluded they did not belong to the Thakur tribe, and the results of an affinity test where the petitioners failed to demonstrate knowledge of tribal customs and language. The court held that the Scrutiny Committee had correctly applied the law, placing the burden of proof on the claimants and giving due weight to the Vigilance Cell report and anthropological evidence over the school records. The court found no perversity in the Committee's decision and dismissed both petitions, upholding the invalidation of their tribe claims.
Headnote
A) Scheduled Tribes - Tribe Claim - Scrutiny Committee - Burden of Proof - The burden lies on the claimant to establish that he belongs to a Scheduled Tribe. The Scrutiny Committee must consider all evidence including school records, affinity test, and Vigilance Cell report. In this case, the Committee invalidated the claim of the petitioners, brother and sister, to belong to the Thakur tribe. The court upheld the decision, noting that the Vigilance Cell report and anthropological evidence contradicted the school records and affinity claims. (Paras 1-10) B) Scheduled Tribes - Affinity Test - Anthropological Evidence - The affinity test, which examines the claimant's knowledge of tribal customs, traditions, and language, is a relevant factor. The court held that the petitioners' failure to demonstrate affinity with the Thakur tribe, coupled with the Vigilance Cell report indicating that they did not belong to the tribe, justified the invalidation. (Paras 5-8) C) Scheduled Tribes - School Records - Evidentiary Value - School records showing caste as 'Thakur' are not conclusive proof of Scheduled Tribe status. They must be corroborated by other evidence such as the tribe's inclusion in the Presidential Order and the claimant's social background. The court found that the school records alone were insufficient to establish the claim. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Scrutiny Committee's invalidation of the petitioners' claim to belong to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe was justified based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Both writ petitions are dismissed. The orders of the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the petitioners' claim to belong to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe are upheld.
Law Points
- Burden of proof on claimant to establish Scheduled Tribe status
- Scrutiny Committee's reliance on Vigilance Cell report
- Affinity test for tribe claim
- Validity of school records as evidence of tribe
- Role of anthropological evidence
