Court holds that pre-Constitution records showing “Thakur” in ancestral documents have highest probative value and that affinity test alone cannot defeat a valid tribe claim.
Mumbai, Sept. 24, 2026: The Bombay High Court has set aside a Scrutiny Committee order that invalidated the caste claim of Ku. Jyoti Donge, holding that her claim to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe was supported by authentic pre-Constitution records and could not be rejected merely on the basis of an adverse affinity test.
A Division Bench of Justices M.S. Karnik and Sandesh D. Patil allowed the writ petition filed by Donge, who had challenged the Committee’s order dated December 24, 2004. The Court directed the authorities to issue her a caste validity certificate within eight weeks.
The petitioner’s claim was supported by documentary evidence tracing her lineage through the paternal side. The Court noted that the birth and death extract of her great-grandfather Tukaram Ramu, dated 1913, recorded the caste as “Thakur.” A similar entry was found in the 1944 record of her grandfather Chandrabhan Tukaram. The father’s school transfer certificate and related school admission records also described the family as “Thakur.”
The Scrutiny Committee had invalidated the claim primarily on the ground that the petitioner failed the affinity test and could not satisfactorily explain the traits and characteristics of the Thakur Scheduled Tribe. It also took the view that an entry of “Thakur” in old records did not by itself establish membership of the Scheduled Tribe.
The High Court disagreed. Relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti v. State of Maharashtra and Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, the Bench reiterated that pre-Constitution documents showing caste entries of the applicant or ancestors carry the highest probative value. The Court said the affinity test is not a “litmus test” and cannot override genuine ancestral records.
The Bench further observed that before the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 came into force, there could be no entry specifically describing a person as “Thakur Scheduled Tribe” in pre-1950 documents. Therefore, the absence of the words “Scheduled Tribe” in old records could not be treated as fatal to the claim.
The Court also rejected the argument that every Thakur claim must be sent to the Vigilance Cell mechanically. It held that such a reference depends on the nature and reliability of the documents produced, and where authentic pre-Constitution records are available, rejection based solely on vigilance inquiry and affinity test is unsustainable.
Finding that the Committee had committed a serious jurisdictional error by ignoring the petitioner’s ancestral documents and relying only on affinity-related reasoning, the Court quashed the impugned order and declared Donge to belong to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe.
Bottom Line :
Scheduled Tribe caste claim - Pre-constitutional documents showing caste entry as “Thakur” in respect of petitioner’s paternal ancestors have highest probative value - Caste claim cannot be invalidated only on affinity test - Mere absence of entry “Thakur Scheduled Tribe” in pre-constitutional record is not fatal, as Scheduled Tribes Order came into force only in 1950.
Statutory provision(s): Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, Entry 21 of the Tribal Community, Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Ku. Jyoti v. Municipal Council Jalgaon Jamod, (Bombay)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2985098
