Bombay High Court
Ashish Balaji Sawant vs Jalindar Tukaram Khaire And Ors on 20 June, 2025
Author: A. S. Gadkari
Bench: A. S. Gadkari
2025:BHC-AS:24475-DB
sns 41-aswp-13548-2024-J(1).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.13548 OF 2024
Ashish Balaji Sawant, ]
Age : 44 Years, Occ.: Service, ]
R/o. Pali-Bhira Road, Nandgaon, ]
Tal-Sudhagad, Dist-Raigad. ] ...Petitioner.
V/s
1. Jalindar Tukaram Khaire, ]
Age- 55 yrs, Occ- Agriculture, ]
R/o. At and Post- Nandgaon, ]
Tal-Sudhagad, Dist-Raigad. ]
2. Sub-Divisional officer, Mangaon, ]
Sub-Division Mangaon, District-Raigad. ]
3. District Collector, ]
Office of District Collector, ]
Raigad. ]
4. District Caste Scrutiny Committee, ]
Raigad, 1402, Flat no.9, Sury no. ]
76/2B, Backside of Saint Merry Convent ]
School, Chendre, Alibag, ]
District-Raigad. ]
5. State of Maharashtra ]
Writ cell, High Court Mumbai. ] ...Respondents.
Mr. C. G. Gavnekar a/w. Adv. Rohit Parab i/by Adv. Prashant Raut for the
Petitioner.
Mr. Ramesh Dube Patil a/w. Adv. Swaraj Patil, Adv. Iraa Dube Patil, Adv.
Ankit Patil i/by Jay & Co. for Respondent No.1.
Ms. M. P. Thakur, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.2 to 5-State.
SUMEDH
NAMDEO
SONAWANE
Digitally signed by
SUMEDH NAMDEO
SONAWANE
Date: 2025.06.20 1/9
19:54:25 +0530
::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2025 03:16:46 :::
sns 41-aswp-13548-2024-J(1).doc
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 24th March, 2025.
PRONOUNCED ON : 20th June, 2025.
JUDGMENT (Per Kamal Khata, J.):
–
1) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and the Petition is heard
finally with the consent of all learned Advocates for the respective parties.
2) By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the Petitioner seeks quashing and setting aside the Order dated 14 th May,
2024, passed by the Respondent No.4-District Caste Scrutiny Committee,
Raigad.
3) Mr. Gavnekar, learned Advocate for the Petitioner states that
the Petitioner had contested the election for the post of Sarpanch and
successfully defeated the Respondent No.1. Aggrieved by the election result,
the Respondent No.1 lodged a complaint with the District Caste Scrutiny
Committee. He submits that, without affording an opportunity of hearing
to the Petitioner, Respondent No.4 passed an Order on 14 th May 2024
(“impugned order”) invalidating the caste claim of the Petitioner.
3.1) Mr. Gavnekar, submits that Respondent No.5 failed to consider
the old records which clearly indicate that, the Petitioner’s grandfather
belonged to the Kunbi caste. He asserts that, the documentary evidence
supporting Petitioner’s caste certificate was not properly appreciated. He
2/9
::: Uploaded on – 21/06/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 22/06/2025 03:16:46 :::
sns 41-aswp-13548-2024-J(1).doc
further contends that, the Respondent No.5 has misconstrued the ratio laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dayaram vs. Sudhir
Batham reported in 2012 1 SCC 333 and Kumari Madhuri Patil vs. Addl.
Commissioner reported in 1994 SCC 241.
4) Per Contra Mr. Ramesh Patil, learned Advocate for Respondent
No.1, submits that the Petitioner has suppressed material facts and relied
upon forged documents to obtain his caste certificate. He asserts that, the
Petitioner belongs to the Maratha community, as evident from his school
leaving certificate dated 24th November, 2013, issued by the Zilla Parishad
School situated at Nandgaon, Taluka Sudhagad, District Raigad which
explicitly records the Petitioner’s caste as “Hindu Maratha”.
4.1) He further submits that, in the year 2021, the Petitioner’s
father, Mr. Balaji Bandu Sawant, applied for registration of a Trust named
‘Nandgaon Parishad Maratha Samaj Unnati Mandal’ under the Bombay
Public Trust Act, 1950 and continues to serve as its President. He points out
that, the primary eligibility criteria to become a member of this Trust is that
the individual must belong to the Maratha community, be over 18 years of
age and reside in Nandgaon area. In support, he relies on the Trust
application of the Petitioner’s father, annexed at Exhibit-A to the reply dated
29th January 2025 filed by Mr. Jalinder Tukaram Khaire-Respondent No.1.
4.2) Mr. Patil further submits that, the Petitioner has relied upon a 3/9 ::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2025 03:16:46 ::: sns 41-aswp-13548-2024-J(1).doc
fabricated school leaving certificate dated 26 th June, 1982, allegedly issued
in the name of his father, to support claim of Kunbi caste. However, a report
submitted by the Headmaster of the Raigad Zilla Parishad School,
Vitthalwadi, Taluka Roha , categorically states that the said certificate was
not issued by the school and that the name of Petitioner’s father does not
appear in the school admission Register.
4.3) Mr. Patil contends that, the Petitioner deliberately withheld the
admission register and accompanying report dated 24 th November, 2023,
issued by the Raigad Zilla Parishad School, Nandgaon, Taluka Sudhagad,
which also records the Petitioner’s caste as Hindu Maratha. These reports
dated 28th February, 2024 and 24 th November, 2023 are annexed at Exhibit-
E and F to the reply.
4.4) He further submits that, the Petitioner has relied upon the caste
validity certificate dated 19th April, 2018 issued in favour of his cousin
sister, Smt. Jyoti Ganpat Sawant. However, two of the three committee
members accepted her Kunbi caste claim based on the same forged school
leaving certificate of the Petitioner’s father, while one member dissented.
The Order of the Caste Validity Committee, dated 19 th April, 2018, explicitly
records that the Petitioner’s father’s school leaving certificate was forged.
4.5) In light of the above facts, Mr. Patil contends that the Petitioner
has committed fraud on Respondent Nos.2 to 4 as well as with this Court.
4/9
::: Uploaded on – 21/06/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 22/06/2025 03:16:46 :::
sns 41-aswp-13548-2024-J(1).doc
He therefore submits that the Petition is devoid of merit and deserves to be
dismissed with costs.
5) Ms. Thakur, learned Advocate appearing for Respondent Nos.2
to 5, submitted that, the school leaving certificate of the Petitioner’s father
was verified by the Police Vigilance Cell of Respondent No.4-Committee and
it was found that the school records did not reflect an entry of admission or
issuance of a leaving certificate in the name of Balaji Bandu Sawant.
Specifically, the records of the Raigad Zilla Parishad School, Vitthalwadi,
Taluka Roha, District Raigad were examined, including the original general
school admission register, and no entry corresponding to Balaji Bandu
Sawant was found. She submitted that, accordingly, the document was
unauthenticated and could not be relied upon.
5.1) She further endorsed the submission of Mr. Patil regarding the
caste validity certificate of the Petitioner’s cousin sister, which was also
based on the same forged document and therefore cannot lend any support
to the Petitioner’s case.
5.2) Addressing the Petitioner’s contention that opportunity of
hearing was afforded, Ms. Thakur submitted that, such an allegation is
contrary to the record as well as the averments in the Petition itself. She
pointed out that, the Petitioner was in fact, granted an opportunity of
hearing on three occasions i.e. on 16th March 2024, 27th March, 2024 and
5/9
::: Uploaded on – 21/06/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 22/06/2025 03:16:46 :::
sns 41-aswp-13548-2024-J(1).doc
30th April 2024. The Petitioner was also permitted to submit additional
documents in support of his caste claim. However, he failed to remain
present before the Committee on the subsequent date and did not furnish
any further supporting evidence.
In light of the above, she submitted that, the Respondent No.4-
Committee rightly invalidated the caste claim by its Order dated 14 th May,
2024.
6) In rejoinder Mr. Gavnekar relied upon the judgment in the case
of Apoorva d/o Vinay Nichale v Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee No. 1 and Ors reported in 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 1053, to
submit that a different view on the same facts would not entitle the
committee dealing with the subsequent caste claim to reject it.
7) We have heard all the learned counsel for the respective parties
and perused entire record.
8) At the very outset, we find ex facie that, the Petitioner has not
approached this Court with clean hands. It is well settled that the party who
invokes the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court is supposed to be
truthful, frank and must necessarily disclose all the material facts without
any reservation, even if they are against such party. It is not open to a Party
who seeks equity to play “hide and seek” or to “pick and choose” certain
facts and to suppress and/or conceal other facts. These principles are
6/9
::: Uploaded on – 21/06/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 22/06/2025 03:16:46 :::
sns 41-aswp-13548-2024-J(1).doc
categorically laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.D.
Sharma vs. Steel Authority of India Limited & Ors. reported in (2008) 12
SCC 481. In the present case the Petitioner’s conduct indicates an attempt
to perpetrate a fraud on the Court. On that ground alone, the Petitioner is
disentitled to any relief.
9) In our view, the present Petition is nothing but a speculative
attempt and appears to be a clear instance of chance litigation. The
averments made are self-contradictory. On the one hand, in paragraph 12 of
the Petition, the Petitioner contends that Respondent No.4 passed the
impugned Order without affording him an opportunity of hearing; yet
contradictorily in paragraph No.8, he admits that, hearings were conducted
on multiple dates.
10) The reliance placed by learned Advocate Mr. Gavnekar in the
case of Apoorva’s case (supra) is misplaced. While the judgement holds a
contrary view taken by a subsequent Committee, in itself may not invalidate
an earlier caste validity certificate, it also categorically lays down that if the
earlier certificate was obtained by fraud, the Committee dealing with the
subsequent claim is neither bound to follow the earlier caste validity
certificate nor precluded from rejecting the claim. In such circumstances,
the Committee is also empowered to initiate appropriate action against the
Applicant.
7/9
::: Uploaded on – 21/06/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 22/06/2025 03:16:46 :::
sns 41-aswp-13548-2024-J(1).doc 11) The reliance placed by Mr. Patil on the decision in Raju
Ramsing Vasave vs. Mahesh Deorao Bhivapurkar & Ors. reported in (2008)
9 SCC 54 is squarely applicable to the facts of this case.
12) In our view, the Petitioner has attempted to take undue
advantage of a caste certificate procured through fraudulent means. Such
conduct is wholly and brazenly inconsistent with the constitutional ethos
and amounts to nothing short of a constitutional fraud. The Petitioner’s
action strike at the very foundation of the affirmative action framework
envisaged under the Constitution.
13) In view of the above, we dismiss the Petition with exemplary
costs of Rs.5,00,000/- to be payable to the ‘Armed Forces Battle Casualties
Welfare Fund’ within a period of four weeks from the date of uploading of
the present Judgment on the official website of the High Court of Bombay.
13.1) Details of the bank account for payment of cost are as under:
Account Name : Armed Forces Battle Casualties
Welfare Fund.
Account Number : 90552010165915.
Bank Name : Canara Bank.
Branch : South Block, Defence Headquarters,
New Delhi - 110011.
IFSC Code : CNRB0019055.
14) The Learned AGP shall intimate about this Order imposing
costs by email, sms or WhatsApp to the Authorised Officer of the Armed
8/9
::: Uploaded on – 21/06/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 22/06/2025 03:16:46 :::
sns 41-aswp-13548-2024-J(1).doc
Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund and maintain record of it.
15) If the Petitioner fails to deposit the said cost within the
stipulated period as noted hereinabove, the Authorised Officer of the Armed
Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund shall intimate the learned AGP by
email or otherwise about the breach, who on such intimation, shall file an
Application before this Court for execution of the present Order and for
recovery of the said amount.
16) Petition is dismissed in aforesaid terms.
(KAMAL KHATA, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)
9/9
::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2025 03:16:46 :::