http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: GANESH S/O GULABRAO SUROSHE

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       17/03/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      This appeal  by special  leave arises from the judgment of the High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, made on 22.4.1996 in Writ Petition No.703/94.      The appellant  claimed to  be a member of the Scheduled Tribes. Admittedly,  the appellant  is ’Tahkur’  by caste, a forward caste.  His frandfather  was shown as a ’Thakur’ but not as  ’Ka’ or  Ma’ Thakur.  In Maharashtra, ’Ma Thakur’ or ’Ka  Thakur’   are  described   as  Scheduled   Tribes.  The appellant, therefore,  claimed the  status  of  a  Scheduled Tribe  and  made  an  application  to  the  authorities  for issuance of  the Caste  Certificate. After  due enquiry, the Scrutiny committee  constituted negatived  the claim  of the appellant for  status of  a Scheduled  Tribe. The  appellant filed a  writ petition  in the High Court which observed out that the  Committee has  minutely enquired into the findings and stated as under:      "This  Court  cannot  examined  the      material on  record as an Appellate      Authority.   If    the   conclusion      reached by Committee is possible on      the  basis   of  the   material  on      record,  then   this  Court  cannot      interfere  in   exercising  of  its      extra ordinary  jurisdiction  under      Article 226  of the Constitution of      India.    Accordingly     it    was      dismissed."      Shri R.S.  Lambat, learned  counsel for  the appellant, contends that  the  Scrutiny  Committee  have  recorded  the finding in paragraph 8 as under:      "With  this   end   in   view   the      Committee has  applied the affinity      test and  concluded  that  affinity      test was negatived. I feel that the      respondent has  been giving  unduly      high stress on the affinity aspect.      It may  not be  necessary that  all      Thakur  Scheduled  Tribes  have  an

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

    affinity  with   Ka  Thakur  or  Ma      Thakur.  The  amplication  of  this      test  is   some  time   viewed   so      mechanically   and   arithmetically      (eligible) the  extraneous  factors      such  as   educational  background,      social environment,  vocational  up      bringing etc. which play a map role      in the shaping of one’s personality      are lost sight of."      It is  contended that  the conclusion  reached  on  the basis of  the findings  of the  Committee is  not warranted. Therefore, the  High Court would have gone into the question and verified  the basis  on which the Scrutiny Committee has scrutinised the  claims of the appellant as a ’Ma Thakur’ or ’Ka Thakur’.  It is  true, as  pointed out  by the  Scrutiny Committee, that  each case is required to be examined in the facts and circumstances of the case. The notification of the President under  Article 342 of the Constitution, subject to the Scheduled  Castes and  Scheduled Tribes  Act,  1976,  is conclusive and  final. There are catena of decisions of this Court holding that the Court cannot examine, to find out the caste of the party, the basis of the certificate issued. The limited area  the Court  can survey  is  whether  the  caste mentioned  in   the  presidential   Notification  would   be applicable   to   the   claimant   or   not.   Under   these circumstances, we  do not  think that  the  High  Court  has committed any error of law warranting interference.      The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No. costs.