High Court Quashes Scrutiny Committee Order Invalidating 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe Claim Due to Perverse Findings and Non-Consideration of Relevant Documents. Matter Remanded for Fresh Consideration

Nature of Litigation: Writ Petition challenging the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee's order invalidating the petitioner's 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe claim

Remedy Sought

Petitioner seeking quashing of the Scrutiny Committee's order dated 19.7.2023 invalidating his 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe claim

Filing Reason

The petitioner's caste claim was invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee on 19.7.2023 after remand from a previous writ petition

Previous Decisions

The petitioner's caste claim was initially invalidated on 30.7.2018 -- The petitioner challenged this in Writ Petition No.909/2021, which was allowed on 14.11.2022, quashing the invalidation order and remanding the matter back to the Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration -- After remand, the Scrutiny Committee again invalidated the caste claim on 19.7.2023, which is challenged in the present petition

Issues

Whether the Scrutiny Committee's findings regarding the documents from 1892-1896 were perverse and erroneous Whether the Scrutiny Committee failed to consider relevant documents including the validity certificate granted to the petitioner's real brother Whether the Scrutiny Committee properly evaluated the petitioner's reply to the vigilance report and affinity test responses

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel argued that the Scrutiny Committee failed to consider the oldest and relevant documents from 1892-1896 showing 'Mana' caste Petitioner's counsel submitted that the Committee's finding regarding contra entries in the 1892-1896 document was erroneous as the petitioner had denied the relationship in his reply to the vigilance report Petitioner's counsel argued that the Committee did not consider the validity certificate granted to the petitioner's real brother, which was a decisive factor Respondent's counsel supported the Committee's findings, arguing that the 1892-1896 document showed contra entries recording caste as 'Kunbi', making the caste claim suspicious Respondent's counsel submitted that school records showed contradictory caste entries for the same person, supporting the Committee's decision

Ratio Decidendi

Scrutiny Committee's findings must be based on proper evaluation of evidence and cannot be perverse -- When the same document shows contradictory caste entries, the Committee must provide proper justification for its findings -- The Committee must consider the oldest and relevant documents in caste claim verification -- Validity certificates granted to close relatives are decisive factors that must be considered -- The Committee must properly evaluate replies to vigilance reports and affinity test responses

Judgment Excerpts

The findings of the Scrutiny Committee apart from being contrary to the record are clearly erroneous since it relies on the same document submitted by the applicant showing caste as 'Mana' but goes on to record in the impugned order that the same is 'Kunbi' Thus, the said finding is entirely perverse We are at pains to understand how a caste of a person would change with respect to the said document

Procedural History

The petitioner's caste claim was initially invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee on 30.7.2018 -- The petitioner challenged this in Writ Petition No.909/2021 -- On 14.11.2022, the High Court quashed the invalidation order and remanded the matter back to the Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration -- After remand, a fresh Police vigilance report was submitted on 26.4.2023 -- The petitioner submitted his reply to the vigilance report on 20.6.2023 -- The Scrutiny Committee again invalidated the caste claim on 19.7.2023 -- The petitioner filed the present Writ Petition No.7398/2023 challenging this order