REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4636 OF 2008

(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 9781 of 2005)

REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL

BANK OF INDIA

—

APPELLANT (S)

VERSUS

MADHULIKA GURUPRASAD DAHIR &

ORS.

—

RESPONDENT (S)

J U D G M E N T

D.K. JAIN, J.:

Leave granted.

2.This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred by the

Central Bank of India, a public sector undertaking, against

the judgment and order dated 6^th April, 2005, passed by the

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, in Writ

Petition No.2558 of 2003. By the impugned judgment, the

1

writ petition filed by the first respondent, hereinafter referred

to as ‘the employee’, challenging the order of termination of

her services has been allowed with a direction to reinstate her

with continuity in service but without back-wages.

3.The employee was appointed to the post of Clerk in the

appellant-Bank with effect from 18^th March, 1981, against a

post reserved for “Scheduled Tribes”, as she had claimed to be

belonging to “Thakur Scheduled Tribe”, on the basis of a caste

certificate issued on 4^th December, 1979. In March, 1991, she

was promoted as Junior Officer. It appears that pursuant to

the instructions issued by the Government of India, Ministry

of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs on 23^rd March,

1990, directing all the public sector banks/financial

institutions to get the caste certificates of the existing

employees, belonging to various scheduled tribes, verified, the

caste certificate filed by the employee was referred to the

Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims,

Nagpur (for short the Scrutiny Committee), respondent No.2

herein.

2

4.The Scrutiny Committee granted an opportunity of hearing

to the employee on 11^th October, 1999; made its own inquiries

and found that the employee was not originally belonging to

“Thakur Scheduled Tribe” but had obtained the Scheduled

Tribe certificate from the issuing authority to take advantage

of various concessions given to the tribal communities. The

Scrutiny Committee discovered that the employee had studied

in Jeevan Shikshan Vidyalaya, Nagpur and by blotting out the

original caste “Rajput Dahayat” as mentioned in the school

leaving certificate, noted down the caste as “Thakur”, and

thus, took admission in college on the basis of caste certificate

“Thakur”, which caste also got mentioned in the college

leaving certificate of the employee. In the absence of any

documentary evidence adduced by the employee to prove her

claim, the Scrutiny Committee relied on the affinity test and

found that the employee did not show any affinity towards

“Thakur Scheduled Tribe”. Accordingly, vide its order dated

2^nd May, 2000, the Scrutiny Committee cancelled the caste

certificate dated 4^th December, 1979, issued to the employee.

3

5.The aforesaid order of the Scrutiny Committee was

challenged by the employee by way of a writ petition. The

High Court allowed the writ petition on the ground that there

was non application of mind on the part of the Scrutiny

Committee; set aside its order dated 2^nd May, 2000 and

remanded the matter to the Scrutiny Committee for

reconsideration of the caste claim of the employee.

6.Pursuant thereto, the Scrutiny Committee, reconsidered the

caste claim of the employee. Concurring with its earlier

findings, vide order dated 29^th May, 2003, the Committee

again rejected the claim of the employee and cancelled the

caste certificate dated 4^th December, 1979. Consequently, by

order dated 28^th June, 2003, the services of the employee were

terminated by the appellant on the ground that her tribe claim

had been invalidated. Aggrieved, the employee preferred a

writ petition challenging both the said orders.

7.It is pertinent, however, to note that at the hearing of the

writ petition before the High Court,