Is Affinity Test Integral To Determination Of Caste Status?What Should Be Parameters To Verify Caste Certificates? Supreme Court Refers To Larger Bench

Observing that two judgments rendered by the Division Bench of the Apex Court have set out different parameters for the verification of caste certificates, a Bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian referred the issue to be authoritatively decided by a Three Judge Bench. Considering the issue arises in several cases in the State of Maharashtra and the fact that the plea was filed far back in the year 2009, the Bench requested the Chief Justice of India to constitute the larger Bench at an early date.

The correctness of the judgment of the Full Bench of the Bombay High Court in Shilpa Vishnu Thakur v. State of Maharashtra And Ors.was the issue before the Bench. In Shilpa Vishnu Thakur (supra), the question before the Full Bench was the standards which have to be applied in determining whether or not an applicant belongs to a designated Scheduled Tribe. The Full Bench was of the opinion that the kinship and affinity to a tribe are vital in determining the correctness of the claim. Therefore, while determining whether a person genuinely belongs to a designated Scheduled Tribe, the Scrutiny Committee ought to consider all material evidence including the satisfaction of the affinity test. The Division Bench of the Apex Court noted regarding Shilpa Vishnu Thakur case as follows -

"The High Court held that the affinity test is an integral part of the determination of the correctness of the claim of the caste certificate. It has been further held that in order to determine whether a person genuinely belongs to a designated Scheduled Tribe, the Scrutiny Committee must have regard to the entire evidence including on the question as to whether the applicant has satisfied the affinity test."

While deciding Vijakumar v. State of Maharashtra And Ors. (2010) 14 SCC 489, the Supreme Court had referred to the decision of the Full Bench of the Bombay High Court in Shilpa Vishnu Thakur (supra). However, later, in Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims And Ors. (2012) 1 SCC 113, the Apex Court without referring to the Full Bench decision or the judgment in Vijakumar (supra), independently, set out parameters that are to be considered while deciding on the genuineness of the caste certificate. It, inter alia, held that the affinity test ought not to be regarded as the litmus test in establishing the link of the applicant with Scheduled Tribe and should not be the sole criteria to reject claims. However, the Supreme Court was of the view that the affinity test may be used to corroborate the documentary evidence.

Taking note of the said variation in parameters to be applied by the Scrutiny Committee in determining the correctness of the caste certificate, the issue was referred to a larger Bench.

[Case Title: Mah. Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti v. State of Maharashtra And Ors. SLP (C) No. 24894 of 2009]