1. Petitioner, a public employee, seeks regularisation of retirement benefits after the invalidation of her caste certificate post-superannuation, despite long service. (Para 2 , 3 , 5 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 5066
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
G. S. Kulkarni, Neela Gokhale, JJ
Mangal Dagadu More – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 13598 OF 2023
Important Points
An employee who has rendered long service and superannuated cannot be denied pensionary and retiral benefits solely due to the post-retirement invalidation of their caste certificate, as such benefits are a recognition of the service rendered and essential to prevent destitution.
Subject
Service Law - Pension & Retiral Benefits
Act Referred
Constitution of India: Art.226
Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backwards Classes and Special Backwards Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000: S.10
Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backwards Classes and Special Backwards Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000: S.10
Headnote
(A) Service Law - Caste Validity - Post-retirement invalidation - Depriving a superannuated employee of pensionary and retiral benefits solely on the ground of invalidation of caste certificate after long years of unblemished service is impermissible and contrary to settled legal principles. (Para 11, 18)
(B) Humanitarian Grounds - Government Policy - Protection of services and benefits for Scheduled Tribe employees in cases of invalidation to prevent penury and destitution in the twilight of their lives, recognizing the long service rendered. (Para 12, 13)
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to pensionary and retiral benefits despite the post-retirement invalidation of her caste certificate.
Result: Petition allowed; the order of invalidation is quashed and set aside, and the respondents are directed to release all retiral benefits with interest.
(B) Humanitarian Grounds - Government Policy - Protection of services and benefits for Scheduled Tribe employees in cases of invalidation to prevent penury and destitution in the twilight of their lives, recognizing the long service rendered. (Para 12, 13)
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to pensionary and retiral benefits despite the post-retirement invalidation of her caste certificate.
Result: Petition allowed; the order of invalidation is quashed and set aside, and the respondents are directed to release all retiral benefits with interest.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr R. K. Mendadkar
For the Respondents: Mr Aditya R. Deolekar
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr R. K. Mendadkar
For the Respondents: Mr Aditya R. Deolekar
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner claims caste status via extensive pre-constitutional documentation and her brother's validity certificate; the State argues against validity and opposes relief. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 )
3. An employee cannot be deprived of retiral benefits solely on post-retirement invalidation of a caste certificate when they served without disciplinary action or protection. (Para 11 , 13 , 18 )
4. Employees whose caste certificates are invalidated post-retirement are entitled to protection of service benefits as a humanitarian measure to avoid destitution in the twilight of life. (Para 11 , 12 , 18 )
5. The impugned order is quashed; authorities are directed to release all pensionary and retirement benefits to the petitioner with interest. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 )
6. Can an employee be denied pensionary benefits if their caste certificate is invalidated after their superannuation?
No. The court held that an employee who has rendered long years of unblemished service cannot be deprived of retiral benefits solely due to the post-retirement invalidation of a caste certificate, as doing so would leave them in penury. (Para 11 , 13 , 18 )
7. Does a state policy protecting the services of employees upon invalidation of their caste certificate apply to retired employees?
Yes. Government policy explicitly provides for the protection of services on humanitarian grounds to obviate administrative exigencies and acknowledges the plight of employees who did not procure a validity certificate during their tenure. (Para 12 , 13 )
8. Are the legal heirs of a deceased employee entitled to family pension if the employee's caste certificate was invalidated?
Yes. The legal heirs are entitled to family pension and retiral benefits when the breadwinner passes away, regardless of whether the caste claim was validated, provided the employee served in their post. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 )
JUDGMENT:
(Per Dr Neela Gokhale, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. By this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks to quash and set aside the order dated 11th February 2022 passed by Respondent No. 2, the Scheduled Tribe Scrutiny Committee, Pune, which invalidated the Petitioner's caste certificate following her superannuation from the post of peon with Respondent No. 3, the Primary Health Centre.
3. The facts leading to the present proceedings are that the Petitioner claims to belong to the Thakar Tribe. The competent authority granted her a caste certificate dated 30th January 2009, certifying that she belonged to the Thakar Tribe. She was employed as a peon at Respondent No. 3, Primary Health Centre. By an application dated 7th October 2009, the Petitioner sought verification of her certificate from the Scheduled Tribes Scrutiny Committee. She submitted evidence, including her school records and revenue records, prior to the deemed date, i.e., 1918, 1919, 1924, 1930, 1932, 1935 and 1940, in favour of her blood relatives on the paternal side, showing their duly recorded caste as Thakar. She also furnished the caste validity certificate of her real brother, granted by Respondent No. 2 Committee, following a thorough vigilance enquiry and in accordance with law.
4. Earlier on a very peculiar reason, her caste certificate was invalidated by an order dated 4th November 2019 of the Scrutiny Committee on a technical ground that it was not in the prescribed Form-C. She was given liberty to obtain a fresh caste certificate in the prescribed form and to file a fresh application for its validation before the Respondent No.2 Committee.
5. On 10th November 2020, she obtained a fresh caste certificate from the competent authority in the prescribed form, which shows that she belonged to the Thakar Scheduled Tribe. She also submitted the caste validity certificate of her real brother, namely Murlidhar Dagduji More, issued by the Respondent No.2 Committee. On 31st May 2020, after 38 years of unblemished service, she superannuated. However, because she was not issued a caste validity certificate, she was made to forgo her right to be considered for promotion. In fact, she was never considered for promotion solely because her validity certificate was not available. This apart her grievance is that, even after her retirement, the pensionary benefits, including gratuity and other retirement benefits, have been withheld for want of the caste validity certificate.
6. On 20th December 2021, the Committee referred the Petitioner’s case to the vigilance cell. She was called for hearing on 9th February 2022, and pursuant to that hearing, the Committee invalidated her tribe claim by its order dated 11th February 2022. It is this order which is assailed in the present petition.
7. Mr R. K. Mendadkar, learned counsel, appeared for the Petitioner, and Mr Aditya Deolekar, learned AGP, represented the State.
8. Mr Mendadkar has assailed the decision-making process of the Respondent No. 2 Committee, contending that the Committee failed to consider the evidence, including a plethora of documents clearly demonstrating that the Petitioner belonged to the Thakar community. He submitted that the order invalidating the Petitioner’s caste certificate is contrary to well-settled principles of law. Documentary evidence predating the Constitution, relating to the Petitioner’s blood relatives in the years 1918, 1919, 1923, 1924, 1930, 1931, 1932, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1940 and 1944, in the form of birth certificates, death certificates and school records, as well as several mutation entries, have consistently recorded the Petitioner’s blood relatives as belonging to the Thakar community. Moreover, the Committee failed to consider that the Petitioner’s ‘real brother’ was also issued a caste validity certificate as belonging to the Thakar community. In thes
