SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL A.M. KHANWILKAR, JJ.
B.H.KHAWAS – APPELLANT
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS – RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9182 OF 2012
Decided On : 12-08-2016
(2008) 4 SCC 612 – Referred
(2001) 1 SCC 4; (2012) 8 SCC 430; (2013) 16 SCC 526; (2014) 4 SCC 434 – Distinguished
Facts of the case:
The appellant was appointed as “Chemical Examiner Grade–I” in the Customs and Central Excise Department in the pay scale of Rs. 3000-100-3500-125-4500, vide appointment letter dated 16th June, 1995, subject to fulfilling terms and conditions mentioned herein. The appellant was appointed against the vacancy reserved for Scheduled Tribe.
Before joining the post of Chemical Examiner in the Customs and Central Excise Department on 21st November, 1995, the appellant had worked in other Departments of the Government of India. All these appointments were made against the Scheduled Tribe reserved category. Lastly, the appellant joined the Customs and Central Excise Department as “Chemical Examiner Grade I”, and was working on that post till his services were terminated consequent to the decision of the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee – that the appellant belonged to caste “Koshti”, which is not a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Maharashtra.
Earlier also the Scrutiny Committee had found that the appellant belongs to Caste “Koshti”, which is not a Scheduled Tribe. That decision of the Scrutiny Committee was challenged by the appellant before the High Court whereupon the decision of the Scrutiny Committee was quashed and set aside and the matter was remanded to the Scrutiny Committee for redetermination of the claim afresh. The Scrutiny Committee finally cancelled the certificate granted by the Executive Magistrate, Nagpur
The appellant tried to take support from the later Constitution Bench decision that his caste was a scheduled tribe caste.
The Central Administrative Tribunal acceded to the contention of the appellant that the appointment made prior to the decision in Milind’s case will have to be protected. Accordingly, the Tribunal allowed the original application and directed re-instatement of the appellant in service by setting aside the order of termination.
The Division Bench of the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the department and restored the termination order dated 8th June, 2004.
Finding of the Court:
Appellant is not entitled to any relief.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT
A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.
This appeal challenges the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No. 7101 of 2005 dated 8th February 2012. The High Court reversed the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay Bench at Mumbai in OA No. 419 of 2004, dated 3rd March, 2005. The Tribunal had allowed the original application filed by the appellant whilst setting aside the termination order dated 8th June, 2004 and instead had directed the respondents to re-instate the appellant in service.
2. Briefly stated, the appellant was appointed as “Chemical Examiner Grade–I” in the Customs and Central Excise Department in the pay scale of Rs. 3000-100-3500-125-4500, vide appointment letter dated 16th June, 1995, subject to fulfilling terms and conditions mentioned herein. As the appellant was appointed against the vacancy reserved for Scheduled Tribe, Condition (vii) of the said Appointment Letter is of some relevance. It reads thus:-
“(vii). In case you belong to Scheduled Caste/Tribe, the appointment is provisional and is subject to verification of Scheduled Caste/Tribe certificate through proper channels and if on verification, your claim to belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, as the case may be, is found to be false, your services will be terminated forthwith without assigning any reason and without prejudice to such further action that may be taken under the Indian penal Code for production of false certificate.”
(emphasis supplied)
3. Before joining the post of Chemical Examiner in the Customs and Central Excise Department on 21st November, 1995, the appellant had worked in other Departments of the Government of India; on being selected through the Union Public Service Commission, to the post of “Senior Technical Assistant” in the Indian Bureau of Mines from 14.02.1985 to 12.05.1986; as an “Assistant Chemist (Group B Gazetted)” in the Geological Survey of India between 15.05.1986 to 31.05.1989; as “Chemist (Groups A Gazetted)” in the Indian Bureau of Mines between 05.06.1989 up to 12.04.1994; and as “Deputy Director (Ind. Hygiene)” in the Directorate General Factory Advice Services and Labour Institutes from 13.04.1994 to 10.11.1995. The appellant was declared confirmed in the grade of “Assistant Chemist” w.e.f. 15.05.1988 vide notification dated 05.05.1995. All these appointments were made against the Scheduled Tribe reserved category. However, lastly, the appellant joined the Customs and Central Excise Department as “Chemical Examiner Grade I”, from 21st November, 1995 pursuant to appointment order dated 16th June, 1995. He was working on that post till his services were terminated vide order dated 8th June, 2004, consequent to the decision of the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee – that the appellant belonged to caste “Koshti”, which is not a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Maharashtra.
4. When the appellant was appointed in the Indian Bureau of Mines, as Chemist in Group A, the said Department vide letter dated 13th January, 1989 had referred his case for Caste Certificate scrutiny to the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur. The Scrutiny Committee after due enquiry answered the reference vide order dated 16th January, 2001. It found that the appellant belongs to Caste “Koshti”, which is not a Scheduled Tribe. That decision of the Scrutiny Committee was challenged by the appellant by way of a Writ Petition No. 376 of 2001, before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench at Nagpur, as having been passed in violation of procedural compliances. That contention commended to the High Court, as a result of which the decision of the Scrutiny Committee was quashed and set aside and the matter was remanded to the Scrutiny Committee for redetermination of the claim afresh. After fresh enquiry in terms of the High Court decision, vide order dated 10th February, 2003, the Scrutiny Committee finally opined as follows:-
“After considering all the documents a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.