JUDGMENT :

R. Devdas, J.

The first respondent herein had preferred two writ petitions, in W.P.No.6383/2014, she had questioned the order of the District Caste Verification Committee and the Appellate Authority, while in W.P.No.29850/2014, the first respondent had questioned the order of dismissal passed by the appellant-employer. Since the orders passed in both the writ petitions arise out of the caste claim made by the first respondent, both the writ appeals are heard and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The first respondent, in response to an advertisement made by the appellant-Company, made an application seeking appointment as Engineer (Grade- II) in a single vacant post which was reserved for Scheduled Tribe category. The first respondent furnished a caste certificate dated 14.01.1991 certifying that she belonged to 'Jenu Kuruba' community which falls under the Scheduled Tribe category.

3. It appears that the first respondent was visited with a notice dated 05.10.2005 issued by the Social Welfare Office, Mandya District, calling upon her to appear in person and produce documents pertaining to her caste status for verification, which had been submitted by her at the time of joining service. After enquiry the District Caste Verification Committee, by order dated 11.11.2009 held that the first respondent does not belong to 'Jenu Kuruba' community but she belongs to 'Kuruba Gowda' community which is not a Scheduled Tribe category. The appellant-Company, having received the order of caste verification, issued a notice to the first respondent to show cause within ten days as to why she should not be dismissed from service. On considering the reply given by the first respondent, the appellant-Company, on holding that the first respondent had submitted a false caste certificate, proceeded to dismiss the first respondent from service, by order dated 14.01.2014. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the first respondent preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority, Scheduled Tribes Welfare, challenging the order dated 11.11.2009 passed by the third respondent-District Caste Verification Committee. In the meanwhile, the first respondent also made an appeal before the Chairman and Appellate Authority of the appellant-Company and the appeal came to be rejected on 04.03.2014. The first respondent filed two writ petitions, challenging the orders of the Caste Verification Committee and the Appellate Authority thereto and the other writ petition was with respect to the order of dismissal and order of the Appellate Authority. Both the writ petitions being allowed by separate orders, the appellant-Company is before this Court assailing the orders passed by the learned Single Judges.

4. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that a larger Bench of three Judges of the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of Chairman and Managing Director, FCI and Others. Vs. Jagdish Balaram Bahira and Others, (2017) AIR SC 3271 has considered all the earlier judgments of the Apex Court in matters of securing appointments on the basis of false caste certificate and the consequences thereto. The learned Counsel for the appellant would further submit that the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Milind and Others, (2001) AIR SC 393, Geeta Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., (2007) AIRSCW 3892, Ritesh Tewari and Another Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2010) 10 SCC 677, Punjab National Bank and Another Vs. Vilas S/o Govindrao Bokade and Another, (2008) 14 SCC 545, Shalini Gajananrao Dalal Vs. New English High School Assocation and Others, (2013) 16 SCC 526, Bank of India Vs. Avinash D. Mandivikar, (2005) 7 SCC 690, and all other decisions have been considered in Chairman and Managing Director, FCI (supra). The learned Counsel would further submit that the basis of the contention put forth by the first respondent having regard to the Circular dated 11.03.2002, issued by the State Government has been considered by the Hon'