MANOHAR S/O ASHALU TOGARWAR v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH SECRETARY, TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI AND OTHERS
Probationary Value of Pre-Independence Documents and Limitations of the Affinity Test in Scheduled Tribe Status Verification.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2026:BHC-NAG:5116-DB
Decision Date: 01-04-2026
List of Laws
Constitution of India, Article 226; Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000; Maharashtra Scheduled Tribes (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Certificate Rules, 2003; Administrative Law - Principles of Natural Justice and Perversity in Quasi-Judicial Findings; Evidence Law - Probative Value of Pre-Independence Documents
- Facts: The petitioners, all blood relatives, claimed to belong to the 'Mannewar' Scheduled Tribe. They submitted several pre-independence documents, including a 1938 birth record of a great-great-grandfather and a 1950 death certificate of a cousin grandfather, both explicitly mentioning 'Mannewar'. However, the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee rejected their claims during a third round of litigation. The Committee discarded the 1938 document alleging a mismatch in rubber stamp signatures and the 1950 document alleging differences in ink and handwriting. Furthermore, the Committee relied on adverse entries like 'Mannepawar' found in school records of relatives and a failed affinity test to invalidate the tribe claim, suggesting the petitioners were attempting to grab benefits through interpolation and fabrication.
- Procedural Posture: The petitioners filed a series of Writ Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court, challenging the common order of the Scrutiny Committee dated 25.07.2018, which had invalidated their tribe certificates.
- Issue: Whether the Scrutiny Committee was justified in discarding pre-independence documentary evidence and a prior High Court observation to reject the 'Mannewar' tribe claim based on suspected interpolation and the affinity test?
- Holding: No, the Scrutiny Committee's order was perverse and untenable. The Court declared that the petitioners had duly established their status as 'Mannewar' Scheduled Tribe and directed the issuance of validity certificates within eight weeks.
- Reasoning: The Court reasoned that pre-independence documents (1938 and 1950) possess great probative and presumptive value as they were created before the community was officially enlisted as a Scheduled Tribe in 1956, meaning there was no motive for fabrication at that time. The Scrutiny Committee discarded these documents based on "surmises and absurd observations" regarding ink and signatures without seeking expert opinions or considering that the Vigilance Cell had raised no such objections. The Court further noted that 'Mannepawar' is not a recognized caste in any statute and is merely a "corrupted pronunciation or writing" of 'Mannewar'. Following the precedent in "Anand vs. Committee for Scrutiny", the Court reaffirmed that the affinity test is not a "litmus test" and cannot be the sole basis to reject a claim supported by strong documentary evidence.
🔒 For Members Only