LexASTHA GOPAL KHAKRA versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2023] 15 S.C.R. 218 : 2023 INSC 945 218 CASE DETAILS ASTHA GOPAL KHAKRA v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. (Civil Appeal no. 7524 of 2019) OCTOBER 11, 2023 [HRISHIKESH ROY AND SANJAY KAROL, JJ.] HEADNOTES Issue for consideration: High Court if erred in rejecting the appellant’s claim as belonging to the Nomadic Tribe-Lohar. Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verifi cation of) Caste Certifi cate Rules, 2012 – rr.3, 16 – Claim of the appellant as belonging to the Nomadic Tribe-Lohar, rejected – Legality: Held: For verifi cation of Caste status, the claimant was required to furnish the information mentioned in r.16 which specifi ed the documents to be furnished as primary information and evidence – Amongst the mentioned documents, the claimant may furnish School Leaving Certifi cate of a relative – She must also indicate proof of permanent residence in the State of Maharashtra, prior to the deemed date i.e., 21.11.1961 – School leaving certifi cates of the appellant’s two paternal uncles clearly demonstrated that the appellant’s grand-father had got his two sons (uncles of the appellant) admitted into the Municipal School at Akola on 12.08.1960 and 18.07.1961 respectively – This itself would clearly establish that the fore-fathers of the appellant had migrated and set up residence in Akola in Maharashtra, prior to the deemed date of 21.11.1961 – The school leaving certifi cates would also satisfy the condition for residence mentioned in r.3 – Scrutiny Committee and the High Court erred in rejecting the appellant’s claim as belonging to the Nomadic Tribe-Lohar – High Court additionally fell into an error by recording that the appellant’s grand-father’s name does not fi gure in the family tree – Decision of the Scrutiny Committee and also the impugned judgment of the High Court are unsustainable – Appellant belongs to the 219 Nomadic Tribe-Lohar – Since she has completed her education in BDS course from respondent no.3, by virtue of the present judgment, her results should now be declared. [Paras 8, 16, 18 and 20] LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao vs Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College & Ors. [1990] 2 SCR 843 : (1990) 3 SCC 130 – distinguished. OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED ORDER AND APPEARANCES CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7524 of 2019. From the Judgment and Order dated 18.09.2018 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay at Nagpur in WP No.4051 of 2017. Appearances: Kunal Cheema, Apoorv Shukla, Raghav Deshpande, Advs. for the Appellant. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Sourav Singh, Aditya Krishna, Gaurav Agrawal, Manan Daga, Advs. for the Respondents. JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT HRISHIKESH ROY, J. Heard Mr. Kunal Cheema, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, learned counsel appears for the State of Maharashtra and District Caste Certifi cate Verifi cation Committee, Akola [respondent nos.1 and 2 respectively]. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, learned counsel appears for the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (Respondent No. 4). 2. The challenge here is to the judgment dated 18.09.2018 of the Division Bench of the High Court whereby the appellant’s challenge to the fi nding of the District Caste Certifi cate Scrutiny Committee, Akola (for short, “Scrutiny Committee”) invalidating her Caste Certifi cate was dismissed. The appellant claims to belong to Nomadic Tribe-Ghisadi of Maharashtra ASTHA GOPAL KHAKRA v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. 220 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 15 S.C.R. mentioned at Entry (8) of Schedule II in the Government Resolution dated 21.11.1961 i.e., Ghisadi-Lohar. By virtue of Circular dated 27.03.1965, the appellant claims to belong to the Ghisadi-Lohar community which is made equivalent to Entry No. (8) of the Schedule II of the Resolution. 3. The fore-fathers of the appellant migrated from the State of Rajasthan and the appellant’s grand-father settled in Akola, Maharashtra. The appellant sought recognition as Nomadic Tribe-Lohar and a certifi cate to this eff ect was issued to her on 10.08.2012 by the Sub-Divisional Offi cer, Akola. The Caste certifi cate issued to the appellant became the subject matter of scrutiny and in the Enquiry Report of the Vigilance Squad dated 27.12.2014 (Annexure P-10), it was refl ected that the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.