Supreme Court of India
YOGESH MADHAV MAKALWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
- Citation
- 2025 INSC 964
- Decided
- 12 August 2025
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Holding
The appellant belongs to the Koli Mahadev Tribe and the Scrutiny Committee’s order invalidating his caste certificate was unlawful, requiring issuance of a Caste Validity Certificate.
Summary
The appellant, a medical aspirant, sought validation of his Scheduled Tribe (Koli Mahadev) caste certificate, which had been confiscated and invalidated by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee. The High Court upheld the Committee’s order, dismissing the appellant’s writ petition. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined pre‑Independence school records showing the appellant’s grandfather, father, and uncle listed as Koli Mahadev, and found the entries authentic with no interpolation. Relying on its earlier judgment in Anand, the Court held that pre‑Independence documents carry greater probative value and that the affinity test is not a decisive litmus test for caste claims. Consequently, the Court quashed the High Court’s decision, held the appellant to belong to the Koli Mahadev tribe, and directed the Committee to issue a Caste Validity Certificate within six weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether a pre‑Independence school record documenting caste should be given decisive probative value in determining a Scheduled Tribe claim.
- Whether failure to satisfy the affinity test alone can justify invalidation of a caste certificate.
- Whether the Scrutiny Committee’s order confiscating and invalidating the appellant’s caste certificate was legally valid.
- Whether the High Court erred in upholding the Scrutiny Committee’s order.
Headnote
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the judgment passed by the High Court upholding the order passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee confiscating and invalidating the Caste Certificate of the appellant and his father for the Headnotes† Social status certificate – Scheduled Tribe Certificate – Caste claim – Confiscation and invalidation – Appellant-student became eligible to medical admission on basis of caste claim of belonging to Koli Mahadev tribe, however his caste certificate, had
Subjects
Schedule Tribe CertificateConfiscation and invalidation of the Caste CertificateScheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny CommitteePre-independence documentAffinity testCaste CertificateSchool Admission and Leaving ExtractSchool recordsScheduled Tribe- Koli MahadevScrutinization of the Caste CertificateInterpolation in the entryProbative valuePresumptions and assumptionsMigration and modernisationTribal populationAnthropological and ethnological traitsDeity, rituals, customsMode of marriageDeath ceremoniesMethod of burialLitmus test
Judgment
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 750 : 2025 INSC 964
Yogesh Madhav Makalwad
v.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 10531 of 2025)
12 August 2025
[B.R. Gavai,* CJI, Satish Chandra Sharma and
K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose as regards the judgment passed by the High Court
upholding the order passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee confiscating and invalidating the Caste Certificate
of the appellant and his father for the Scheduled Tribe-Koli Mahadev.
Headnotes†
Social status certificate – Scheduled Tribe Certificate – Caste
claim – Confiscation and invalidation – Appellant-student
became eligible to medical admission on basis of caste claim of
belonging to Koli Mahadev tribe, however his caste certificate,
had not been validated till then – Appellant filed writ petition
seeking direction for scrutinizing his Caste Certificate –
During the pendency, the Scrutiny Committee invalidated
the claim of the appellant and his father disbelieving various
documents placed on record-School Admission and Leaving
Extract of the appellant’s grandfather from the year 1943,
the school records of the appellant’s father and appellant’s
uncle, and their certificates were cancelled and impounded
by the Scrutiny Committee – Appellant then amended the
writ petition challenging the order passed by the Scrutiny
Committee confiscating and invalidating the Caste Certificate
of the appellant and his father for the Scheduled Tribe – High
Court dismissed the petition – Sustainability:
Held: Appellant belongs to the Koli Mahadev Tribe – Words
Koli Mahadev written in the entry are in the same ink and in the
same handwriting, thus, no scope for interpolation in the said entry –
On the basis of this pre-Independence entry, the school records
of the appellant’s father and his uncle also show the caste as
Koli Mahadev – In view of the pre-Independence document
* Author
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 751
Yogesh Madhav Makalwad v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
which certifies that the appellant’s grandfather to be belonging to
Koli Mahadev Tribe, a greater probative value ought to have been
given to the said document, however, on the basis of presumptions
and assumptions, the said document was disbelieved – As
regards the affinity test, with the change in times, migration and
modernisation, the joining of people from the tribal population in the
mainstream of the society, the fact that they are not in a position to
recollect the anthropological and ethnological traits, deity, rituals,
customs, mode of marriage, death ceremonies, method of burial,
etc., of their tribe cannot be solely a ground ipso facto to deny the
said claim – Affinity test is not a litmus test to decide the caste
claim and is not an essential part in the process of determination
of correctness of a caste or tribe claim in every case – Thus, the
order of the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the appellant’s caste
claim as well as the order of High Court not sustainable in law –
Order passed by the High Court quashed and set aside – Scrutiny
Committee to issue Caste Validity Certificate to the appellant.
[Paras 10-17]
Case Law Cited
Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny & Verification of Tribe Claims
and Others [2011] 15 SCR 386 : (2012) 1 SCC 113; Maharashtra
Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti v. State of Maharashtra
and Others [2023] 3 SCR 1100 : (2023) 16 SCC 415 – referred to.
List of Keywords
Schedule Tribe Certificate; Confiscation and invalidation of the
Caste Certificate; Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee;
Pre-independence document; Affinity test; Caste Certificate; School
Admission and Leaving Extract; School records; Scheduled Tribe-
Koli Mahadev; Scrutinization of the Caste Certificate; Interpolation in
the entry; Probative value; Presumptions and assumptions; Affinity
test; Migration and modernisation; Tribal population; Anthropological
and ethnological traits; Deity, rituals, customs; Mode of marriage;
Death ceremonies; Method of burial of dead bodies; Litmus test.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 10531 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.07.2024 of the High Court
of Judicature at Bombay at Aurangabad in WP No. 8702 of 2019
752 [2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
Uday Bhaskar Dube, Sr. Adv., Kailas More, Nirmala D. Borade,
Ms. Meena Sehrawat.
Advs. for the Respondents:
Varad Kilor, Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Aaditya Aniruddha Pande,
Shrirang B. Varma.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
B.R. Gavai, CJI
FACTUAL ASPECT
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal challenges the judgment and final order dated 23rd
July, 2024 passed by the learned Division Bench of the High Court
of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad1 in Writ Petition No.
8702 of 2019. Vide the impugned judgment and final order, the High
Court dismissed the petition challenging the order dated 24th June,
2019 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee,
Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad2 confiscating and invalidating the
Caste Certificate of the appellant and his father for the Scheduled
Tribe – Koli Mahadev.
3. The facts, in brief, leading to the filing of the present appeal are as
under:
3.1. Way back in the year 1943, the appellant’s grandfather, namely,
Jalba Malba Makalwad, was admitted in Zilla Parishad Primary
School, Narangal, Degloor Taluka, Nanded District wherein his
caste was mentioned as Koli Mahadev.
3.2. Thereafter, in the years 1975 and 1979, appellant’s uncle,
namely, Vyankat Jalba Makalwad and appellant’s father, namely,
1 Hereinafter referred to as “the High Court”
2 Hereinafter referred to as “the Scrutiny Committee”
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 753
Yogesh Madhav Makalwad v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Madhav Jalba Makalwad, were admitted in Zilla Parishad
Primary School, Kabirwadi, Degloor Taluka, Nanded District.
In the admission register, their caste was mentioned as Koli
Mahadev.
3.3. In the year 2005, the appellant was admitted in the Janta Vidya
Mandir Primary School, Murud Taluka, Latur District wherein
his caste was also mentioned as Koli Mahadev.
3.4. On 21st May 2010, the State of Maharashtra issued a circular
being Government Circular No. A.Ja.U.2009/Pra.No.61/Ka-1413
thereby announcing the implementation of certain schemes in
villages/colonies having a Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe
population exceeding 40%. On the basis of the 2001 census,
appellant’s village is included in the list of eligible villages under
the said circular.
3.5. It appears that as on 18th June, 2010, the appellant’s school
leaving register also mentions him belonging to the caste Koli
Mahadev.
3.6. In 2019, the appellant appeared for the National Eligibility-cum-
Entrance Test (NEET) UG examination, wherein he scored 334
marks out of 720 marks thereby, becoming eligible for admission
in a Medical College on the strength of his Caste Certificate.
However, the Caste Certificate of the appellant had not been
validated till then. The appellant, therefore, filed a writ petition
being W.P. No. 8702 of 2019 before the High Court seeking
direction for scrutinizing his Caste Certificate at the earliest so
that he can be admitted in a Medical College.
3.7. During the pendency of the writ petition, the Scrutiny Committee
vide order dated 24th June, 2019 invalidated the claim of the
appellant and his father disbelieving various documents placed
on record such as the School Admission and Leaving Extract
of the appellant’s grandfather from the year 1943, the school
records of the appellant’s father as well as the school records of
appellant’s uncle. Resultantly, the Scheduled Tribe Certificates
of the appellant and his father were cancelled and impounded
by the Scrutiny Committee.
754 [2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
3.8. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant amended his writ petition
additionally challenging the order dated 24th June, 2019 passed
by the Scrutiny Committee.
3.9. Vide impugned judgment and final order, the learned Division
Bench of the High Court dismissed the petition stating that
the school records of the relatives of the appellant are neither
reliable nor competitive to the claim of the appellant and
therefore, upheld the order dated 24th June, 2019 passed by
the Scrutiny Committee confiscating and invalidating the caste
claim of the appellant.
3.10. Being aggrieved thereby, a special leave petition was filed
by the appellant in which notice was issued vide order dated
27th January 2025.
SUBMISSIONS
4. We have heard Shri Uday Bhaskar Dube, learned senior counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as Shri Shrirang B.
Varma and Shri Varad Kilor, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent-State.
5. Shri Uday Bhaskar Dube, learned senior counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant submitted that the Scrutiny Committee as
well as the High Court has grossly erred in dismissing the claim
of the appellant. It is submitted that the School Admission and
Leaving Extract of the appellant’s grandfather, which was recorded
on 10th October, 1943 clearly indicates the caste as Koli Mahadev. It
is submitted that the same being a pre-Independence document will
have a greater probative value and the Scrutiny Committee as well
as the High Court ought to have taken the same into consideration
and held the appellant’s caste claim of belonging to Koli Mahadev
Tribe valid.
6. Per contra, Shri Shrirang B. Varma and Shri Varad Kilor, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent-State have vehemently opposed
the appeal. They submitted that the so-called document of 1943 is
not free from doubt as the opinion on handwriting with regard to
interpolation is inconclusive. It is further submitted that the appellant
has failed the affinity test. The appellant has not been in a position
to depose before the Scrutiny Committee with regard to the customs
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 755
Yogesh Madhav Makalwad v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
and traditions followed by the Koli Mahadev Tribe, as such, on this
ground also the claim has been rightly invalidated.
ANALYSIS
7. At the outset, it would be apposite to refer to the judgment of this Court
in the case of Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny & Verification of
Tribe Claims and Others3. It would be relevant to refer paragraph
22 of the said judgment which reads thus:
“22. It is manifest from the aforeextracted paragraph
that the genuineness of a caste claim has to be
considered not only on a thorough examination of
the documents submitted in support of the claim
but also on the affinity test, which would include the
anthropological and ethnological traits, etc., of the
applicant. However, it is neither feasible nor desirable
to lay down an absolute rule, which could be applied
mechanically to examine a caste claim. Nevertheless,
we feel that the following broad parameters could be
kept in view while dealing with a caste claim:
(i) While dealing with documentary evidence,
greater reliance may be placed on pre-
Independence documents because they
furnish a higher degree of probative value
to the declaration of status of a caste, as
compared to post-Independence documents.
In case the applicant is the first generation
ever to attend school, the availability of any
documentary evidence becomes difficult, but
that ipso facto does not call for the rejection of
his claim. In fact, the mere fact that he is the
first generation ever to attend school, some
benefit of doubt in favour of the applicant may
be given. Needless to add that in the event of
a doubt on the credibility of a document, its
veracity has to be tested on the basis of oral
3 (2012) 1 SCC 113
756 [2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
evidence, for which an opportunity has to be
afforded to the applicant;
(ii) While applying the affinity test, which
focuses on the ethnological connections with
the Scheduled Tribe, a cautious approach
has to be adopted. A few decades ago,
when the tribes were somewhat immune
to the cultural development happening
around them, the affinity test could serve
as a determinative factor. However, with the
migrations, modernisation and contact with
other communities, these communities tend
to develop and adopt new traits which may
not essentially match with the traditional
characteristics of the tribe. Hence, the affinity
test may not be regarded as a litmus test for
establishing the link of the applicant with a
Scheduled Tribe. Nevertheless, the claim by
an applicant that he is a part of a Scheduled
Tribe and is entitled to the benefit extended to
that tribe, cannot per se be disregarded on the
ground that his present traits do not match his
tribe’s peculiar anthropological and ethnological
traits, deity, rituals, customs, mode of marriage,
death ceremonies, method of burial of dead
bodies, etc. Thus, the affinity test may be used
to corroborate the documentary evidence and
should not be the sole criteria to reject a claim.”
[emphasis supplied]
8. It can, thus, be seen that this Court held that while dealing with
documentary evidence, greater reliance may be placed on pre-
Independence documents because they furnish a higher degree of
probative value to the declaration of status of a caste, as compared
to post-Independence documents. Insofar as the applicability of
the affinity test is concerned, the Court observed that a cautious
approach has to be adopted. It has been observed that a few
decades ago, when the tribes were somewhat immune to the cultural
development happening around them, the affinity test could serve as
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 757
Yogesh Madhav Makalwad v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
a determinative factor. However, with the migrations, modernisation
and contact with other communities, these communities tend to
develop and adopt new traits which may not essentially match with
the traditional characteristics of the tribe. It is, therefore, held that
the affinity test may not be regarded as a litmus test for establishing
the link of the applicant with a Scheduled Tribe. It has been held
that merely because the applicant does not match the tribe’s peculiar
anthropological and ethnological traits, deity, rituals, customs, mode
of marriage, death ceremonies, method of burial of dead bodies etc.,
it cannot be solely taken into consideration for rejecting the claim of
belonging to the Scheduled Tribe.
9. In the present case, the appellant has placed on record the School
Admission and Leaving Extract in respect of his grandfather namely,
Jalba Malba Makalwad, recorded on 10th October, 1943 which
indicates his caste as Koli Mahadev. Though the report of the
handwriting expert is inconclusive as to whether there is interpolation
or not, we have examined the said document with a magnifying glass.
10. On the perusal of the entry, it is clear to us that the words Koli
Mahadev written in the entry are in the same ink and in the same
handwriting. Therefore, we find that there could be no scope for
interpolation in the said entry. It is further to be noted that on the
basis of this pre-Independence entry, the school records of the
appellant’s father, Madhav Jalba Makalwad and his uncle, Vyankat
Jalba Makalwad also show the caste as Koli Mahadev.
11. One of the reasons given by the High Court in not accepting the
caste claim of the appellant is that the same is not supported by
any validated document. We are informed that it is appellant’s father
and the appellant who have applied for the first time for validation
of their Caste Certificate. The Scrutiny Committee has invalidated
the claim of both, the appellant as well as his father.
12. In view of the pre-Independence document which certifies that the
appellant’s grandfather, Jalba Malba Makalwad, to be belonging to
Koli Mahadev Tribe, we are of the considered opinion that a greater
probative value ought to have been given to the said document.
However, on the basis of presumptions and assumptions, the said
document has been disbelieved.
13. Insofar as the affinity test is concerned, as held by this Court in Anand
(supra), with the change in times, migration and modernisation, the
758 [2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
joining of people from the tribal population in the mainstream of
the society, the fact that they are not in a position to recollect the
anthropological and ethnological traits, deity, rituals, customs, mode
of marriage, death ceremonies, method of burial of dead bodies,
etc., of their tribe cannot be solely a ground ipso facto to deny the
said claim.
14. We may also gainfully refer to a recent judgment of this Court rendered
by the three learned Judges in the case of Maharashtra Adiwasi
Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti v. State of Maharashtra and
Others4 which reiterated the position that the affinity test cannot be
conclusive either way. It has been held that when the affinity test
is conducted by the Vigilance Cell, the result of the test along with
all other material on record having probative value will have to be
taken into consideration by the Scrutiny Committee for deciding the
caste validity claim. It has been reiterated that the affinity test is not
a litmus test to decide the caste claim and is not an essential part
in the process of determination of correctness of a caste or tribe
claim in every case.
15. Apart from that, the view taken in Anand (supra) that pre-Independence
documents will have a greater probative value while considering the
claim of the applicant has been followed by this Court as well as
various High Courts in catena of decisions.
CONCLUSION
16. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered view that the
order of the Scrutiny Committee invalidating the appellant’s caste
claim as well as the impugned judgment and final order of the High
Court upholding the same is not sustainable in law.
17. In the result, we pass the following order:
i. The appeal is allowed;
ii. The impugned judgment and final order dated 23rd July, 2024
passed by the Division Bench of the High Court is quashed
and set aside; and
4 (2023) 16 SCC 415
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 759
Yogesh Madhav Makalwad v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
iii. It is held that the appellant belongs to the Koli Mahadev Tribe.
The Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue Caste Validity
Certificate to the appellant within a period of six weeks from
the date of this judgment.
18. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
Result of the case: Appeal allowed.
†
Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Schedule Tribe Certificate"Sign in to search