26 February 2025 Civil Suits >> Civil & Consumer Law  

In a recent ruling, the Bombay High Court quashed the decision of the Respondent No.2, which had invalidated the tribe claims of three petitioners seeking to obtain a Scheduled Tribe (ST) certificate for Koli Mahadev. The petitioners were descendants of individuals who had already been issued valid certificates by the relevant authorities, yet their claims had been rejected. The Court’s decision clarified important legal principles regarding the issuance of caste certificates and the rights of petitioners with valid genealogical claims. 

Factual Background: 

The petitioners—Kinjal Bastav, Manav Bastav, and Aayush Bastav—sought to secure a Koli Mahadev Scheduled Tribe certificate, asserting their claim based on their paternal lineage. The petitioners’ blood relations, including their father, paternal uncle, and other close relatives, had previously received caste validity certificates confirming their belonging to the Koli Mahadev tribe. However, despite the established validity of their relatives' claims, the petitioners' applications were rejected by Respondent No.2 in October 2024. 

The rejection was based on an inquiry involving another individual, Nischal Chintaman Bastav, whose claim had been invalidated. The Respondent contended that the invalidation of Nischal’s claim somehow impacted the petitioners’ eligibility for the tribe certificate, despite no direct familial connection being shown between Nischal and the petitioners. 

Legal Proceedings and Petitioners' Arguments: 

The petitioners approached the Bombay High Court, challenging the invalidation of their tribe claims. They argued that their blood relatives, including their father and paternal uncle, had already received caste validity certificates confirming their status as Koli Mahadev. Additionally, they pointed out that Nischal Chintaman Bastav, whose claim had been invalidated, was not related to them by blood, and thus his invalidation should not affect their case. The petitioners’ lawyer emphasized that the tribe certificates of their relatives were still valid and that the Respondent’s reliance on the invalidation of a non-relative’s claim was erroneous. They also presented a genealogy tree, establishing their direct line of descent from the validated relatives. 

Respondent’s Position: 

The State’s representative, Ms. Pooja Joshi Deshpande, opposed the petitioners' claim, asserting that the invalidation of Nischal’s claim impacted the validity of the tribe certificates issued to the petitioners' relatives. However, she was unable to establish any direct relationship between Nischal and the petitioners, nor could she provide evidence that the previous caste certificates had been invalidated. 

Court’s Ruling: 

The Bombay High Court, after considering the arguments and reviewing the evidence presented, ruled in favor of the petitioners. The Court emphasized that the tribe validity certificates issued to the petitioners’ direct blood relatives from the paternal side remained intact and should not have been disregarded by Respondent No.2. The Court also noted that there was no substantial connection between the petitioners and the individual whose tribe claim had been invalidated. The Court further observed that the Respondent had failed to follow established legal procedures for caste certificate verification, as outlined in the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000. It ruled that the petitioners had sufficiently proven their claim by demonstrating their familial connection to the validated tribe certificate holders. 

Conclusion: 

In conclusion, the Bombay High Court directed Respondent No.2 to issue Koli Mahadev Scheduled Tribe validity certificates to the petitioners within 30 days. The Court's decision upheld the sanctity of genealogical evidence and clarified that the invalidation of a non-relative's tribe claim cannot automatically invalidate the claims of other legitimate descendants within the same family. This ruling highlights the importance of following due legal process in matters of caste certificate issuance and reinforces the right of individuals to prove their tribal affiliation through established familial ties.