G.S. Kulkarni, J.

The Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the termination order dated 10 April 2014 passed by Respondent No.1 – Mumbai Municipal Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') and the communication dated 30 January 2016 whereby the Petitioner's representation for reinstatement stands rejected.

2. This petition was adjourned from time to time to enable the Respondents to take instructions. First time this petition had appeared before the Court on 3 May 2016 and thereafter finally by our order dated 23 September 2016 we had directed that the petition be listed for final disposal. This is how the matter is listed today before us. We accordingly take up the writ petition for final disposal.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, in our opinion, this is an unfortunate case. The Corporation issued an advertisement dated 15 June 2011 to undertake recruitment. The post in question is of a clerk under the reserved category. The Petitioner had applied on 26 November 2011 for appointment to the said post as a reserved category candidate belonging to the "Nomadic Tribe". On 5 March 2012, the Petitioner underwent a typing examination as also a physical fitness test. The Corporation having considered the Petitioner qualified and eligible, on 28 May 2012, appointed the Petitioner as a clerk at the B.Y.L. Nair Hospital from the said reserved category (NT), on a temporary basis on probation for a period of three years. This appointment was subject to the Petitioner seeking validity of the caste certificate from the appropriate Caste Scrutiny Committee.

4. The case of the Corporation is that though the Petitioner accepted the appointment, the Petitioner did not disclose the fact that the Petitioner's claim for the Caste validity was rejected by the Caste Scrutiny Committee by an order dated 30 April 2012 and despite this, the Petitioner accepted the appointment order. The Petitioner has, however, given an explanation in that regard, that the Petitioner was not aware of the receipt of the order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee which was received at his home town Akola and the envelope containing the order was received by his mother who is an illiterate lady and was not aware of the contents. The Petitioner became aware of the same only in November 2012 when he visited Akola.

5. However, this did not detain us inasmuch as after coming to know of the order of the Caste Scrutiny Committee dated 30 April 2014, the Petitioner initiated proceedings. The Petitioner being aggrieved by the said decision of the Caste Scrutiny Committee approached the Nagpur Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 6280 of 2012. By a decision of the Division Bench dated 23 July 2013, the order passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee was set aside and the Caste Scrutiny Committee was directed to reexamine the issue in the light of the directions as contained therein and take a necessary decision within a period of six months.

6. Accordingly, the Caste Scrutiny Committee considered the claim of the Petitioner and has issued a Caste Validity Certificate dated 15 July 2015 in favour of the Petitioner. By virtue of the grant of validity to the caste certificate issued to the Petitioner, the necessary condition of the appointment order, that the Petitioner shall seek validity of the certificate stands fulfilled. Thus, there is no dispute that the Petitioner has rendered himself eligible for appointment as a reserved category candidate.

7. However, in the intervening period, something what has happened at the hands of the Corporation is not only surprising but disturbing. The Corporation, on the ground that the caste validity certificate was initially rejected by the Caste Scrutiny Committee by virtue of an order dated 30 April 2012 and on a presumed ground that the Petitioner had played a fraud in not disclosing the decision of the Caste Scrutiny Committee wh