SAU. JAYASHRI BHASKAR GOSAVI Vs. VISHWANATH KRISHNATH PANKE & ORS

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Civil), 3896-3897 of 2016, Judgment Date: Apr 12, 2016

                                                             NON-REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                     CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3896-3897 OF 2016
             [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) 29633-29634 OF 2015 ]

SAU. JAYASHRI BHASKAR GOSAVI                                 Appellant (s)

                                   VERSUS

VISHWANATH KRISHNATH PANKE & ORS.                            Respondent(s)


                               J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.
1.    Leave granted.
2.    The dispute raised in these cases essentially pertains to a  claim  by
the appellant that she belongs  to  the  Scheduled  Tribe  community  named,
'Hindu Gosavi'.  There is no dispute that  her  husband  belonged  to  Hindu
Gosavi Scheduled Tribe.  The allegation was that, on the basis of the  caste
status of her husband, the appellant  had  procured  a  certificate  to  the
effect that she belonged to the  Scheduled  Tribe  community  namely,  Hindu
Gosavi.

3.    There cannot be any dispute  that  a  wife  cannot  claim  the  tribal
status of  her  husband.   The  tribal  status  should  be  based  on  one's
independent roots.

4.    The Caste  Scrutiny  Committee,  namely,  Regional  Caste  Certificate
Verification Committee No. 1 for SC, ST, VJNT,  OBC  and  SBC,  Solapur  (in
short, "the  Committee")  in  the  State  of  Maharashtra,  by  order  dated
22.08.2014, cancelled the certificate originally granted  to  the  appellant
on 24.10.2002 to the effect that she belonged to  the  Hindu  Gosavi  Tribal
community.

5.    The order dated  22.08.2014  was  challenged  before  the  High  Court
unsuccessfully and thus, the appellant is before this Court.

6.    Inviting reference to the family tree produced before  us  along  with
additional documents and also the orders passed  by  the  Committee  in  the
case of the children of  the  appellant's  real  brother  and  orders  dated
21.11.2013 and 03.01.2014 and various other certificates of the  members  of
the family, it is submitted that the appellant is  also  entitled  to  claim
the same tribal status.

7.    The learned counsel for the respondent-State,  inviting  reference  to
the case of "Raju Ramsing Vasave  Vs.  Mahesh  Deorao  Bhivapurkar  &  Ors."
reported in (2008) 9 SCC 54, submits that merely because  another  Committee
has granted a particular Scheduled Tribe status  to  other  members  of  the
family, it cannot be held that the person aggrieved by denial  of  the  same
status be given the same treatment.   It  is  submitted  that  it  could  be
possible  that  those  certificates  could   have   been   issued   wrongly.


8.    We have no quarrel with the  settled  proposition  of  law.   But  the
question here is whether all these relevant aspects have been considered  by
the Committee.

9.    On going through the impugned orders passed by the the High Court  and
the Committee, we find that the contentions advanced by the  appellant  have
not been considered  by  the  Committee.   Therefore,  in  the  interest  of
justice, we feel it appropriate to grant an opportunity to the appellant  to
approach the Committee afresh by filing additional documents  and  producing
evidence.

10.   The appeals are, hence, disposed of with a direction to the  Committee
that in the event of  the  appellant  approaching  the  Committee  within  a
period  of  two  months  from  today  by  filing  additional  documents  and
requesting for adducing evidence thereof, the Committee shall  consider  the
request made by the appellant and thereafter, shall pass appropriate  orders
in the matter expeditiously.

11.   We make it clear that neither the impugned  Judgment  nor  the  orders
already passed by the Committee shall stand in  the  way  of  the  Committee
considering the matter afresh, as above.
      No costs.
                                                   .......................J.
                                                        [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]


                                                   .......................J.
                                                        [R. K. AGRAWAL ]

      New Delhi;
      April 12, 2016.