REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL No.2095 OF 2007

Vilas Dinkar Bhat  ….Appellant(s)

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra & Ors.        …Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1) This appeal is directed against the final

judgment and order dated  12.07.2004  passed  by

the  High  Court of  Judicature  at  Bombay in  Writ

1

Petition  No.7518 of 2002 and the judgment and

order dated 11.12.2006 in Review Petition No.2982

of 2006 whereby the High Court dismissed the Writ

Petition  and also the  Review Petition filed  by the

appellant herein.

2) Few facts need to be mentioned to appreciate

the short issue involved in the appeal.

3) The question arises in this appeal is about the

caste of the appellant­whether the appellant belongs

to a caste, known as “Thakar”­ a Schedule Tribe, or

not.

4) According to the appellant, he by birth belongs

to “Thakar”  caste  which  is a Schedule Tribe and,

therefore,  he is entitled to claim a  declaration to

that effect in his favour.

5) For claiming this declaration, the appellant

approached to  the Committee concerned and also

the High Court of Bombay twice but his claim

2

suffered dismissal before the  Committee and the

High Court in the writ petition on both the

occasions giving rise to filing of this appeal by way

of special leave against the order of the High Court.

6) Submission of learned counsel for the

appellant was essentially one.  His argument is that

though the appellant had filed as many as 50

documents in support of his case to prove that he

belongs to a caste “Thakar” but unfortunately

neither the Committee and nor the High Court

examined the documents in their proper perspective

in their respective jurisdiction  and, therefore, the

matter needs to be reconsidered by the Committee

afresh.

7) Learned counsel especially brought to our

notice the documents at pages 30 to 33 of the SLP

paper  book,  which,  according to learned  counsel,

are in his favour but none of these documents were

3

considered either by the Committee or the  High

Court.

8) In reply, learned  counsel for the respondent

(State)  supported the  impugned order of the High

Court.

9) Having heard the learned counsel for the

parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we

are  inclined to allow the appeal and while setting

aside the impugned order and also the order of the

Committee, remand the case to the Committee for

fresh consideration  of the appellant's case on its

merit.

10) On perusal of the Committee's order, we find

that the Committee though considered some

documents filed by the appellant but did not

consider all the documents on which the appellant

had placed reliance. The High Court in its writ

jurisdiction declined to go into the merits of the writ

4

petition stating that since the issue involves

questions of fact, it is not possible to examine the

case on facts in its writ jurisdiction. It is more so

when the Committee probed the issue in detail on

facts.  

11) In our opinion, when a party relies upon any

evidence, whether it is oral or documentary, in

support of his case, the

Court/Committee/Authority, as the case  may  be,

and especially the original Court is under an

obligation to apply its mind to the entire

documentary evidence on which the party has

placed reliance for proving his case and record its

reasoned findings whether   accepting the evidence

or rejecting it.   What is important is the

consideration of entire evidence adduced by the

parties  in accordance with  law while  deciding  the

case.  

5

12) It is for this reason, we consider it proper to

remand the case to the Committee for

reconsideration of the appellant's case on its merits

in accordance with law keeping in view our

observation made  supra  because we find that this

principle was not followed by the Committee while

considering the appellant's case.

13) The Committee will decide the  matter after

affording an opportunity to the appellant strictly in

accordance  with law  without being influenced  by

any  of our  observation  on  merits  which  we  have

refrained to make once formed an opinion to

remand the case to the Committee.

6

14) The appeal thus succeeds and is accordingly

allowed. Impugned order and the order of the

Committee are set aside. The case is remanded to

the  Committee  for its  disposal  afresh,  as directed

above, within six months.     

                  ………...................................J.   [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]

                                    …...……..................................J.

        [S. ABDUL NAZEER]

New Delhi; August 10, 2018  

7