Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Asst G.M.&Dis.Authy.Syndicate Bank vs Ashok . on 20 February, 2014

fQ
                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                        CIVIL APPEAL No.8412 OF 2009



ASST G.M.&DIS.AUTHY.SYNDICATE BANK & ANR            .......APPELLANTS


                                   VERSUS

ASHOK & ORS.                                        ......RESPONDENTS



                              O   R   D     E   R

            The respondent applied for appointment against the post of
Clerk with the Syndicate Bank by seeking benefit of the fact that he
belonged to the Halba, Scheduled Tribe. The candidature of the respondent
was accepted. He was appointed as a Clerk on 21.03.1985.    He, thereafter,
came to be confirmed as such on 18.11.1985.        The appellant i.e. the
Syndicate Bank did not question the validity of the Caste Certificate
produced by the respondent till 16.06.1998 when the respondent was, for the
first time, called upon to submit the original documents for reference to
the Caste Certificates Scrutiny Committee. It is apparent, that by the
time he was called upon to respond the queries relating to his caste, he
had already rendered service for more than 13 years with the appellant
bank.
            Despite the ambiguity of the Caste Certificate furnished by the
respondent while seeking employment with the appellant, he came to be
promoted against the post of Assistant Manager on 08.05.2001.
            Dissatisfied with the response received from the respondent,
the appellant-bank issued a chargesheet dated 06.11.2001, wherein the
misconduct alleged against the respondent was, that in spite of demand to
submit the original Caste Certificate, the respondent had not submitted the
same. The respondent replied to the chargesheet on 29.11.2001 wherein he
informed his employer that the original Caste Certificate had been lost and
a police report had been filed by him.
             Finding the reply of the respondent unsatisfactory,         the
Syndicate Bank terminated the services of the respondent, by an order dated
28.02.2003. The order of termination was assailed by the respondent before
the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Nagpur Bench) (hereinafter referred
to as the ‘High Court’) by filing Writ Petition No.2507 of 2003. The High
Court disposed of the aforesaid writ petition with the following order:
                 "The order dated 20.2.2003 passed by respondent nos.1 and
           2 thereby terminating the services of the petitioner is quashed
           and set aside.
                 The respondent nos.1 and 2 are directed to reinstate the
           petitioner on the post of Assistant Manager within a period of
           one month from today.
                 The respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to re-submit the
           documents submitted to them by the petitioner to respondent No.3
           the Scheduled Tribe Scrutiny Committee within a period of two
           months from today. On receipt of whatever documents submitted
           by the petitioner, the respondent No.3 shall verify the caste
           claim of the petitioner. It is made clear that respondent no.3
           shall not insist for the       original   or   duplicate   Caste
           certificate.
                 If the respondent No.3 Committee validates the caste claim
           of the petitioner, he would be entitled to further benefits on
           the basis of his tribal claim.
                 If the respondent No.3-Committee invalidates the caste
           claim of the petitioner, he would not be entitled to any of the
           benefits in future as are available to the members of the
           Scheduled Tribe. However, invalidation of the caste claim by
             the Caste Scrutiny Committee shall not be a ground           for
             termination of services of the petitioner in view of the
             judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra
             vs. Milind Katwarae (cited supra).
                   It is further made clear that in case the caste claim of
             the petitioner is invalidated, right of the petitioner to
             challenge the same would be protected.
                   Rule is accordingly made absolute in the aforesaid terms."




A perusal of the order passed by the High Court reveals that the High Court
set aside the order of termination. The High Court further required the
Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee to verify the caste claim of
the respondent. In its aforesaid direction, the High Court expressly
directed that the appointment of the respondent with the Syndicate Bank
would not be affected with the outcome of the Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee. It was further clarified, that in case the caste claim
made by the respondent was invalidated, the respondent would be entitled to
assail the same in accordance with law.
              During the course of hearing, learned counsel         for   the
appellant, handed over to us, a xerox copy of the order dated 16.01.2007
passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur
Division, Nagpur. The same is taken on record and marked as ‘Annexure A’.
A perusal of ‘Annexure A’ reveals, that the Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee having considered all the documents and facts had
arrived at the conclusion, that the respondent did not belong to the Halba,
Scheduled Tribe. Hence, the claim of the respondent as a member of the
above tribe was invalidated. The caste certificate issued to him, was
accordingly cancelled.
             In view of the above factual position, learned counsel for the
appellant vehemently contends, that the employment of the respondent with
the Syndicate Bank was vitiated on account of fraud and is, therefore,
liable to be set aside. It is the above contention of the learned counsel
for the appellant, which has to be considered by us, especially in view of
the directions issued by the High Court in the impugned order (which has
been extracted hereinabove).
             Insofar as the instant aspect of the matter is concerned, it is
essential to point out, that a similar issue came to be examined by this
Court in Shalini vs. New English High Sch.Assn.& Ors. (Civil Appeal
No.10997 of 2013 @ SLP(C)No.2680 of 2010 decided on 12.12.2013). The issue
which has been agitated before us was considered in the background of a
Government Resolution dated 15.06.1995.       The observations recorded in
Shalini case (supra) by a Division Bench of this Court, are being extracted
hereinbelow:
                   "In Nimje another Two-Judge Bench held that Government
           Resolution dated 15.6.1995 would continue to apply even after the
           passing of the 2000 Act so long as the appointment had taken
           place prior to 1995. There is, therefore, palpable wisdom in the
           Office Memorandum dated 10.8.2010 of the Government of India,
           Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department
           of Personnel & Training to the effect that "it has been decided
           that the persons belonging to the ’Halba Koshti/Koshti’ caste who
           got appointment against vacancies reserved for the Scheduled
           Tribes on the basis of Scheduled Tribe certificates, issued to
           them by the competent authority,        under   the   Constitution
           (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 (as amended from time to time)
           relating to the State of Maharashtra and whose appointments had
           become final on or before 28.11.2000, shall not be affected.
           However, they shall not get any benefit of reservation after
           28.11.2000."




Based   on   the   Government   Resolution   dated   15.06.1995,   this   Court   in
Shalini’s case allowed the claim of the appellant,         validating  her
employment with the New English High School.
            In the background of the conclusion drawn by this Court in
Shalini’s case, we find that the operative part of the order contained in
the impugned order of the High Court dated 27.09.2005 calls for no
interference. Our view is based on the fact, that herein also the
respondent’s appointment (as in Shalini’s case), had become final on
21.03.1985/18.11.1985 i.e. well before 28.11.2000.
            For the reasons recorded hereinabove, the instant appeal is
dismissed.


                                                  ...........................J.
                                                 (JAGDISH     SINGH     KHEHAR)




............................J.
                                  (S.A. BOBDE)

NEW DELHI;
FEBRUARY 20, 2014.




ITEM NO.102                   COURT NO.12            SECTION IX


              S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F    I N D I A
                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
                      CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 8412 OF 2009


ASST G.M.&DIS.AUTHY.SYNDICATE BANK & ANR             Appellant (s)

                   VERSUS

ASHOK & ORS.                                         Respondent(s)

(With office report)

Date: 20/02/2014    This Appeal was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
          HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR
          HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE

For Appellant(s)    Ms.Soumyashree Kulkarni, Adv.
                       Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR(Not Present)

For Respondent(s)         Mr.Matrugupta Mishra, Adv.
                       Mrs. Sarla Chandra, AOR(Not Present)

                       Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, AOR(Not Present)


             UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
                                 O R D E R

The instant appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order.

(Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Assistant Registrar ( Signed order is placed on the file )