Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The reason for dismissal of the employee was because he claimed benefit of appointment under the Appellant-Board on the basis of a caste certificate issued to him showing himself to be 'Halba', a Scheduled Tribe.

4. On 07.05.1994, the private Respondent was appointed on the post of Manager, Hast Shilp Vikas Nigam, against a reserved post for Scheduled Tribe. It may be noticed that the said caste certificate came under scrutiny of the Caste Scrutiny Committee even earlier which held the said certificate issued to the private Respondent dated 09.08.1991 to be invalid since the private Respondent was not a 'Halba' but admittedly 'Koshti'.

(2017) 8 SCC 670.

12. It is a rather detailed order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court virtually taking notice of not only the history of the litigation about the status of a 'Halba' tribe or 'Halba Koshti' but also the protection which was extended to such persons who were held to be not a tribe.

13. Learned counsel representing the Appellant-Board submits that as law stands today with the admitted position that the private Respondent is not a Scheduled Tribe, whether he can be permitted to continue with the benefit of having acquired service under the Board claiming himself to be a Scheduled Tribe and occupying a post which was reserved for a Scheduled Tribe. According to him, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court laying down the position in the Food Corporation of India (supra), leaves no ambiguity as to the status as well as the kind of benefit or protection which is required to be extended to an employee who is denuded of his false claim of being a Scheduled Tribe and the kind of benefit he can derive by offering to give up the status of Scheduled Tribe or Caste and being treated as a general candidate.

(2) Whether 'Halba Koshti' caste is a sub-tribe within the meaning of Entry 19 (Halba/Halbi) of the said Scheduled Tribes Order relating to State of Maharashtra, even though it is not specifically mentioned as such?'

8. After thorough discussion of the matter the conclusions of the Bench are recorded in paragraph 36 of the report. It was held that it is not at all permissible to hold any enquiry or let in any evidence to decide or declare that any tribe or tribal community or part of or group within any tribe or tribal community is included in the general name even though it is not specifically mentioned in the Entry concerned in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. It was further held that the notification issued under Clause (1) of Article 342, specifying Scheduled Tribes, can be amended only by law to be made by Parliament and it is not open to the State Governments or courts or any other authority to modify, amend or alter the list of Scheduled Tribes specified in the notification issued under Clause (1) of Article 342 and the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order 1950. The law declared by the Constitution Bench does not at all lay down that where a person secures an appointment by producing a false caste certificate, his services can be protected on his giving an undertaking that in future he will not take any advantage of being a member of the reserved category.

45.1 Though in Entry 19 of the Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950 only " Halba-Halbi" has been recognised as a Scheduled Tribe, until the decision of the Constitution Bench in Milind3, Halba

- Koshtis were "socially and officially" recognized and accepted as a sub-tribe of Halba-Halbi. This may have been as a result of the judicial pronouncement made by the High Court from 1956 or the circulars issued by the State Government;

45.1 It was on 28.11.2000 that the Constitution Bench in Milind3 held that Halba - Koshtis do not fall within the purview of Entry 19 of the Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950. Hence, it cannot be said that a caste certificate issued at any time prior to 28.11.2000 in favour of a citizen who was a Halba Koshti was false or a fraud and it can only be held that such a person ceased to be recognized as Halba-Halbi Scheduled Tribe;