http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

PETITIONER: KUMARI APARNA SHRIKANT BHAYE

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT24/08/1990

BENCH: KANIA, M.H. BENCH: KANIA, M.H. REDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J)

CITATION:  1990 AIR 2250            1990 SCR  Supl. (1)   1  1990 SCC  (4) 172        JT 1990 (3)   622  1990 SCALE  (2)443

ACT:     Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act 1976--Para 9, Entry 29--Son Kolis--Whether a section  of the Scheduled Tribe of Mahadeo Koli.

HEADNOTE:     The petitioner sought admission to a medical college  in the State of Maharashtra on the footing that she belonged to the  Scheduled Tribe of Mahadeo Koli and  submitted  several caste certificates, including her father’s Secondary  School Leaving Certificate. The Scrutiny Committee, the expert body for determining such claims, rejected her claim on the basis of  entries  made in 1945 in the register of  the  Municipal Primary School, where her father had his primary  education, which  showed that the caste of the petitioner’s father  was recorded  as  ’Son Koli’. This decision was  upheld  by  the Additional  Commissioner  for Tribal Development.  The  High Court summarily dismissed the petitioner’s writ petition.     In  the  Special Leave Petition before  this  Court,  on behalf  of  the petitioner it was contended  that  the  High Court was in error in rejecting the Writ Petition  summarily and that the Scrutiny Committee had proceeded on an entirely erroneous basis as the real basis of the petitioner’s  claim was  that Son Kolis were a section of the Schedule Tribe  of Mahadeo Koli. Dismissing the Special Leave Petition, this Court,     HELD:  Entry 29 of the list of Scheduled Tribes  in  the State  of Maharashtra, appearing in Para 9 of the  Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment)  Act,  1976 shows that ’Koli Mahadeo’ is a Scheduled Tribe recognised in Maharashtra.  In the list of Backward Classes issued by  the State, Kolis are recognised as belonging to "other  backward classes". Son Kolis are shown as belonging to other backward classes  in the list of other backward classes. These  docu- ments nowhere support the claim that Son Kolis are a section of  Scheduled  Tribe of Mahadeo Koli. Though Kolis  are  de- scribed as a tribe in the publication entitled "Transactions of the Bombay Geog- 2 raphical Society from 1836 to 1838", a perusal of the  rele- vant  observations shows that no distinction has been  drawn

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

in the said publication between castes and tribes. [2D-F]     Admittedly,  Mahadeo Koli is a Scheduled  Tribe  whereas Son Koli is a caste. The Scrutiny Committee cannot be fault- ed for placing great reliance on the entries in the register of the primary school where the petitioner’s father took his primary  education, as at the time when these  entries  were made  there  was no reason why he should have made  a  wrong statement  about  the caste or tribe to which  he  belonged. These  entries were made in 1945, when there was no  special advantage which the Scheduled Tribe of Mahadeo Koli  enjoyed over the members of the caste of Son Koli. The  certificates relied  upon  by the petitioner have been  rejected  by  the Scrutiny Committee primarily because these certificates were inconsistent  with the entries in the said register  of  the Primary School relating to the petitioner’s father to  which the  Committee attached great probative value, as it was  of the  view that they were made at a time when no question  of making  any  manipulation arose. The reasons  given  by  the Scrutiny  Committee for the rejection cannot be said  to  be irrelevant or perverse. There is no complaint that the rules of fair play have not been observed by the Scrutiny  Commit- tee. [4A-E]

JUDGMENT:     CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Special  Leave  Petition (Civil) No. 11493 of 1989     From the Judgment and Order dated 7.9.1989 of the Bombay High Court in W.P. No. 3762 of 1989.     Mrs. Indira Jaisingh, Tripurari Ray and M.N. Shroff  for the Petitioner. V.N. Ganpule and A.S. Bhasme for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by     KANIA,  J.  This Special Leave is directed  against  the judgment  of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court  dis- missing  summarily Writ Petition No. 3762 of 1989  filed  by the petitioner.     The  petitioner passed the Higher Secondary  Certificate (hereinafter  referred to as "the H.S.C.") examination  held in March 1989, and sought admission to a medical college  in Bombay  conducted by the Government or one of the  Municipal Medical Colleges in the city of 3 Bombay  on  the footing that she belonged to  the  Scheduled Tribe of Mahadeo Koli. In support of her claim she  tendered certain caste certificates. Her application was referred, in accordance  with the relevant rules to the Scrutiny  Commit- tee.  which  is an expert body for  determination  of  caste claims,  for verifying her claim to belong to the  aforesaid Scheduled  Tribe.  In support of her claim,  the  petitioner submitted several caste certificates obtained by her. At the hearing  before the Scrutiny Committee the  petitioner  also furnished  the Secondary School Leaving Certificate  of  her father.  Her  father was requested to  furnish  his  Primary School Leaving Certificate or birth certificate in order  to ascertain the correct caste of the petitioner but he  failed to produce the same. The Committee, therefore, conducted the necessary inquiries at the Municipal Primary School,  Worli, Koliwada, Bombay where the petitioner’s father had taken his primary education. That school by its letter dated April 29, 1989, disclosed entries made in register of the said  school showing  inter  alia,  that the caste  of  the  petitioner’s father  was recorded as "Son Koli". These entries were  made in 1945 when there was no special advantage which the Sched-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

uled  Tribe of Mahadeo Koli enjoyed over the members of  the caste of Son Koli. It was pointed out by the Committee  that these  entries are entitled to a very great probative  value as they have been made at a time when no question of  making any manipulation arose. The certificates relied upon by  the petitioner  have  been rejected by  the  Scrutiny  Committee primarily because these certificates were inconsistent  with the  entries  in  the said Register of  the  Primary  School relating  to the petitioner’s father to which the  Committee attached  great  probative value. The reasons given  by  the Scrutiny  Committee for the rejection cannot be said  to  be irrelevant or perverse. There is no complaint that the rules of  fairplay have not been observed by the scrutiny  Commit- tee.  It rejected the claim of the petitioner that  she  be- longed to the Scheduled Tribe of Mahadeo Koli. This decision was upheld by the Additional Commissioner for Tribal  Devel- opment,  State of Maharashtra in an appeal preferred by  the petitioner. Against the decision the petitioner filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging the  aforesaid decision and that writ petition was summarily dismissed by a Division Bench of that High Court.     We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner who has strongly urged that the High Court was in error in rejecting the writ petition summarily as it is done. We find, however, that it has not been shown how the decision of the  Scrutiny Committee or the Appellate decision of the Commissioner  for Tribal Welfare discloses any error calling for any interfer- ence in a writ petition. The entire controversy 4 has to be appreciated in the light of the admitted fact that Mahadeo  Koli  is a Scheduled Tribe whereas Son  Koli  is  a caste. We cannot find fault with the Scrutiny Committee  for placing great reliance on the entries in the register of the primary  school where the petitioner’s father took his  pri- mary education, as at the time when these entries were  made there  was no reason why he should have made a wrong  state- ment about the caste or tribe to which he belonged.     It was sought to be contended by learned counsel for the petitioner  that  Scrutiny  Committee has  proceeded  on  an entirely erroneous basis as the real claim of the petitioner is  that Son Kolis are a section of the Scheduled  Tribe  of Mahadeo  Koli.  We find, however, that this  contention  has nowhere been raised before the Scrutiny Committee or  before the  Commissioner of Tribal Welfare although it does  appear to have been raised in the writ petition. It was not open to the  petitioner to raise this contention for the first  time in the writ petition. Learned counsel drew our attention  to the list of the Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra appearing  in Para 9 of the Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled Tribes  Orders  (Amendment) Act, 1976. Entry 29  shows  that "Koli Mahadeo" is a Scheduled Tribe recognised in  Maharash- tra. In the list of Backward Classes issued by the State  of Maharashtra  we find that Kolis are recognised as  belonging to "other backward classes". Son Kolis are shown as  belong- ing to other backward classes in the list of other  backward classes issued by the State of Maharashtra. These documents, however,  nowhere  support the claim that Son  Kolis  are  a section of Scheduled Tribe of Mahadeo Koli.     Learned counsel for the petitioner drew our attention to a publication entitled "Transactions of the Bombay Geograph- ical  Society from 1836 to 1838" which has been  printed  in 1844.  In this publication, Kolis are described as  a  tribe but  a  perusal of the relevant observations  show  that  no distinction  has  been  drawn in  this  publication  between castes  and  tribes, and hence, the statements made  in  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4  

said publication do not lend any support to the claim of the petitioner.     In  the result, there is no merit in the  special  leave petition and it is dismissed. No orders as to costs. N.P.V.                              Petition dismissed. 5