JUDGMENT :

D.K. JAIN, J.

Leave granted.

2. This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred by the Central Bank of India, a public sector undertaking, against the judgment and order dated 6th April, 2005, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, in Writ Petition No.2558 of 2003. By the impugned judgment, the writ petition filed by the first respondent, hereinafter referred to as ‘the employee’, challenging the order of termination of her services has been allowed with a direction to reinstate her with continuity in service but without back-wages.

3. The employee was appointed to the post of Clerk in the appellant-Bank with effect from 18th March, 1981, against a post reserved for “Scheduled Tribes”, as she had claimed to be belonging to “Thakur Scheduled Tribe”, on the basis of a caste certificate issued on 4th December, 1979. In March, 1991, she was promoted as Junior Officer. It appears that pursuant to the instructions issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs on 23rd March, 1990, directing all the public sector banks/financial institutions to get the caste certificates of the existing employees, belonging to various scheduled tribes, verified, the caste certificate filed by the employee was referred to the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Nagpur (for short the Scrutiny Committee), respondent No.2 herein.

4. The Scrutiny Committee granted an opportunity of hearing to the employee on 11th October, 1999; made its own inquiries and found that the employee was not originally belonging to “Thakur Scheduled Tribe” but had obtained the Scheduled Tribe certificate from the issuing authority to take advantage of various concessions given to the tribal communities. The Scrutiny Committee discovered that the employee had studied in Jeevan Shikshan Vidyalaya, Nagpur and by blotting out the original caste “Rajput Dahayat” as mentioned in the school leaving certificate, noted down the caste as “Thakur”, and thus, took admission in college on the basis of caste certificate “Thakur”, which caste also got mentioned in the college leaving certificate of the employee. In the absence of any documentary evidence adduced by the employee to prove her claim, the Scrutiny Committee relied on the affinity test and found that the employee did not show any affinity towards “Thakur Scheduled Tribe”. Accordingly, vide its order dated 2nd May, 2000, the Scrutiny Committee cancelled the caste certificate dated 4th December, 1979, issued to the employee.

5. The aforesaid order of the Scrutiny Committee was challenged by the employee by way of a writ petition. The High Court allowed the writ petition on the ground that there was non application of mind on the part of the Scrutiny Committee; set aside its order dated 2nd May, 2000 and remanded the matter to the Scrutiny Committee for reconsideration of the caste claim of the employee.

6. Pursuant thereto, the Scrutiny Committee, reconsidered the caste claim of the employee. Concurring with its earlier findings, vide order dated 29th May, 2003, the Committee again rejected the claim of the employee and cancelled the caste certificate dated 4th December, 1979. Consequently, by order dated 28th June, 2003, the services of the employee were terminated by the appellant on the ground that her tribe claim had been invalidated. Aggrieved, the employee preferred a writ petition challenging both the said orders.

7. It is pertinent, however, to note that at the hearing of the writ petition before the High Court, the employee did not challenge the correctness of the order of the Scrutiny Committee, dated 29th May, 2003 and the same attained finality, which manifestly shows that the employee accepted the finding of the Scrutiny Committee that she did not belong to “Thakur Scheduled Tribe”, as recorded on the caste certificate filed for obtaining employment. The order of termination of service was challenged only on the ground of inordina