SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 578

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Narendra Kumar Johri, J, Kumar Rajesh Chandra, A
Jitendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A. No. 051/00230/2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mrs. M.M. Pal. Sr. Adv.
For the Respondents: Shri Amit Sinha, ld. ASC.

Central government appointments follow strict Presidentially notified Scheduled Caste list under Article 341; state mergers or local corrigenda cannot include sub-castes listed as OBC.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 341 - Scheduled Castes - Verification of caste certificate - Central list of Scheduled Castes notified by President governs central government appointments - State lists or mergers of sub-castes not applicable - Entries in list must be read strictly without modification by courts, tribunals or authorities - Power to amend rests solely with Parliament - Caste certificate claiming sub-caste as part of Scheduled Caste rejected where sub-caste appears in Central OBC list. (Paras 25, 26, 27)

(B) Service Law - Reservation - Fake caste certificate - Candidature cancelled where verification reveals mismatch between claimed Scheduled Caste and actual caste per records, confirmed by nodal ministries - Prior employment under unreserved/ex-serviceman category supports non-SC status. (Paras 11, 14, 16, 24)

Facts of the case:
Applicant ranked second in selection for reserved post under Scheduled Caste category, submitted caste certificate later verified as erroneous - Local authorities issued corrigendum merging sub-caste with Scheduled Caste per state notification, but central ministries clarified sub-caste not in Central Scheduled Caste list, appearing instead in OBC list - Prior employment under unreserved/ex-serviceman quota - Rejection order upheld by Tribunal.

Findings of Court:
DRDO governed by central list under Article 341 - State clarification on sub-caste merger inapplicable - Competent authority rightly cancelled candidature post consultation with Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment and DOPT.

Issues: Validity of caste certificate with clerical error later corrigendum-ed by district authorities versus binding nature of Central Scheduled Caste list; applicability of state caste merger to central government post.

Ratio Decidendi: Central government appointments adhere strictly to Presidentially notified Scheduled Caste list - Local or state modifications/clarifications cannot confer reservation benefits; verification by nodal ministries prevails over issuing authority's corrigendum.

Result: Original Application dismissed.

Table of Content
1. applicant's selection and caste certificate verification issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
2. central ministry opinions rejecting sc status for tatwa caste. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
3. applicant's arguments citing state judgments and equality. (Para 17 , 18)
4. recap of facts and prior tribunal directions. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
5. central sc list governs; tatwa not included per article 341. (Para 25 , 26 , 27)
6. state judgments inapplicable; oa dismissed. (Para 28 , 29 , 30)

O R D E R

Per- JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JOHRI, MEMBER [J]

1.Instant Original Application has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief(s):

“8.1 The rejection order dated 26th Dec 2018 issued by Dy. Director for Chairman, DRDO (Ann-A/6) be quashed.

8.2 The Respondents be directed not to give effect to the rejection order dated 26th Dec 2018 and to reconsider the case of this petitioner for his appointment on the selected post on and from the date of appointment of the 1st candidate lower to the petitioner in the recommended list of the UPSC with all consequential benefits.

8.3 The Respondents be directed to issue appointment letter to the petitioner on the basis of the corrigendum dated 26.05.2018 wherein the error on the report on caste certificate has been clarified and corrected.

8.4. The Respondents be directed petitioner and to issue appointment letter at par with the other selected candidates without any further delay.

8.5) The Respondents be directed to issue at least provisional appointment letter immediately in terms of their own circular/ OM dated 9th Sept 2005, March 2007 and 8th Oct 2015, if anything is yet to be verified.

8.6 Any other relief or reliefs for which the applicant is entitled to.”

2. The case of the applicant in nutshell is that the applicant was initially appointed in Indian Navy Service and retired on 31.01.2014 after 15 years continuous service. Thereafter, he joined in the office of Principal Accountant General (A&E), Jharkhand on 22.03.2016 under Ex- servicemen category (without opting for qualifying under caste category).

3. Before joining in the office of Principal Accountant General, pursuant to Advertisement No. 52/2016 dated 27.02.2016, he has applied for the post of Senior Administrative Officer Grade-I in Defence Research SINHA and Development Organisation (DRDO), Ministry of Defence. For selection, computer-based recruitment test was held on 22.05.2016 at Kolkata Centre. Thereafter, he was called for interview by the UPSC on 10.08.2016 and subsequently result was declared on 16.08.2016 wherein the applicant secured 2nd rank in the seniority list under Scheduled Caste Category. The same was informed to the applicant by the UPSC vide letter dated 22.08.2016. After publication of result a letter was issued by the Under Secretary (SPC-I) UPSC wherein the applicant was informed that his name has been recommended for post of Sr. Administrative Officer, Grade I and the offer of appointment will be made to him only after the government satisfaction.

4. Thereafter, applicant was directed to furnish the required information/documents relating to educational qualification, experience certificate, caste certificate and vide letter dated 18th April 2017, the Dy. Director (Per-AA1) for Chairman, DRDO directed the petitioner to furnish two required documents for verification of character and Antecedents. The required information was furnished by the applicant vide his representation dated 25.10.2016 and 1st May 2017.

5. The caste certificate furnishedby him was sent for verification and after verification report was sent to the DRDO wherein his case was filled as TATWA instead of PAN as a result the letter from SDM office mentioned caste in the first Para as TATWA while in second Para it was filled as PAN which was forwarded to DRDO.

6. The applicant, after knowing error in his caste certificate, he made representation on 01.04.2018 and online reply was also received from DRDO

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top