BHUMIKA RAVINDRA KOLI v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Caste Certificate Validity: High Court emphasizes probative value of pre-constitutional documents and proper scrutiny of alleged interpolations in tribe claims, particularly regarding 'Tokre Koli' and 'Dhor Koli'.

Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-AUG:33539-DB
Decision Date: 04-12-2025

List of Laws

Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Maharashtra Act No. XXIII of 2001; The Indian Evidence Act; Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam; Section 8 of the Act of 2000; Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee Rules of 2003

Case Brief

Facts: Kum. Bhumika Koli challenged the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee's order refusing to validate her 'Tokre Koli' Scheduled Tribe Certificate. The Committee discarded pre-constitutional entries describing her forefathers as 'Dhor Koli', ‘Koli Dhor' and ‘Tokre Koli' due to alleged interpolations in school and birth/death registers. The petitioner argued that these interpolations, if any, occurred in government custody and that 'Dhor Koli' and 'Tokre Koli' are essentially the same for the Presidential Order.
Procedural Posture: This case originated as a Writ Petition (No. 717 of 2021) filed in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order of the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee.
Issue: Did the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee err in refusing to validate the petitioner's 'Tokre Koli' Scheduled Tribe Certificate, particularly by discarding pre-constitutional documents due to alleged interpolations and by not properly considering that 'Dhor Koli' and 'Tokre Koli' are treated as the same in the Presidential Order?
Holding: Yes, the High Court held that the Committee's order was unsustainable and directed the Committee to issue a validity certificate of "Tokre Koli, Scheduled Tribe" to the petitioner.
Reasoning: The Court found that the Committee failed to properly consider pre-constitutional documents, which carry greater probative value. While the Committee cited interpolations, the Court scrutinized the records and found no conclusive evidence of tampering. The Court emphasized that the Committee should have sought explanations from the custodians of the original records regarding the alleged interpolations. Furthermore, the Court noted that 'Dhor Koli' and 'Tokre Koli' are recorded at the same serial number in the Constitution of India, Scheduled Tribe Order, and that the petitioner had discharged the burden of proving her caste claim. The Court also cited previous judgments, including Anand Vs. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims and others and Sayana Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, to support its reasoning regarding the probative value of pre-Independence documents and the need for expert opinion on handwriting analysis.