The petitioner approached this Court in writ petition No.30235 of 2004 challenging the order dated 7th July 2004 passed by the Commissioner, Social Welfare Department and sought for quashing of the same. The Writ petition came to be rejected by its order dated 18th January 2005. The petitioner was appointed as lecturer, when this impugned order was issued against him.

2. The case of the respondent is that though the petitioner did not belong to Scheduled Caste but by misrepresentation and by adopting fraudulent method, the petitioner obtained caste certificate and made use to select appoint as a lecturer. The impugned notice was issued alleging that the petitioner had committed fraud, which he had challenged before this Court. This Court, while disposing of the writ petition passed the order as follows:

“(i) Writ petition is dismissed;

(ii) The finding of the authorities that the petitioner does not belong to Hindu-Bhovi community is upheld;

(iii) This judgment shall not affect the petitioner’s appointment as a Lecturer and now as a Selection Grade Lecturer enjoying UGC scale;

(iv) It is made clear that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any advantages in future or for any other constitutional or other purpose on the ground that he belongs to Bhovi community a Scheduled Tribe.”

3. In the light of the observation made by this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it attained finality. Now, the petitioner, during the interregnum, has retired from service and is entitled for pension. It is further submitted that after the petitioner has retired from service, the case has been launched against the petitioner in Special (SC/ST) case No.16 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge at Haveri alleging offences under Sections 196, 198, 420 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(ix) of Karnataka Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The petitioner was tried for the said offences. However, the Criminal case ended-up in acquittal. On the basis of the same and the observation made by this Court in Writ Petition referred to above, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner is entitled for pensionary benefits.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner got appointment on the basis of the caste certificate obtained by playing fraud. It is alleged, though the petitioner does not belong to Bhovi community, falling under Scheduled Caste, but has obtained caste certificate as if he belonged to Scheduled Caste and got appointment as lecturer and also retired from service after attaining superannuation. By virtue of his illegal and fraudulent act he has deprived the very constitutional opportunity that is provided to a person who actually belongs to Scheduled Caste. On the other hand, he had served till the attainment of superannuation. Now, he seeks pensionary benefits. Person who seeks equatorial relief or a constitutional relief shall approach the Court with clean heart and soul. Fraudulent petitions shall not be entertained for any type of consideration by the High Courts. It is not the case of the petitioner that he belonged to a Scheduled Caste for the benefit. He himself has admitted that he does not belong to Scheduled Caste. It is his case that since he has retired from service, he is eligible for pensionary benefits. It is made clear that when a person has committed offence on the constitutional provisions against a person who is entitled for consideration for the purpose of relaxation under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India, he shall not be entitled for any benefits that he seeks for. In the case on hand, the petitioner has served his entire service and retired from service depriving the chance for the eligible candidate. It is also to be observed that when a person commits fraud on the constitutional provisions, he shall not be entitled for any relief from the Court wh