Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Judgment. wp5569.12

3. Shri Narnaware, learned Counsel submits that the basic document namely Caste Certificate issued to the petitioner as belonging to Halba Scheduled Tribe is not found obtained by playing any fraud and hence, is not a false caste certificate. The law as expounded in the case of Kavita Solunke .vrs. State of Maharashtra and others (supra), and various other judgments of this Bench of Bombay High Court, therefore, must be applied and the order of termination must be set aside. He points out that Government of India has issued a notification/ Office Memorandum on 10.08.2010 protecting the services of employees like present petitioner.

7. We find that in Judgment of Hon'ble 2 Judges in the case of Regional Manager, Central Bank of India .vrs. Madhulika Guruprasad Dahir and others (supra), a plea of protection of employment due to long service was pressed and the Hon'ble Apex Court found that it was already rejected in series of its decisions. It has, therefore, found it not necessary to launch an exhaustive dissertation on principles. The Hon'ble Apex Court notes that in a few decisions, admission or appointment were not cancelled because of "peculiar factual matrix obtaining therein, the consensus of judicial opinion is found to be equity, sympathy or generosity has no place where the original appointment rests on a false caste certificate, such a person cannot plead equity, nor the Court is justified in exercising equity jurisdiction in his favour." It has been observed that "an act of deliberate deception with a design to secure something which is otherwise not due, tantamount to fraud".

Judgment. wp5569.12

8. In Union of India .vrs. Dattatray Namdeo Mendhekar and others (supra), the Hon'ble 3 Judges have considered the Constitutional Bench judgment in case of State of Maharashtra vs. Milind (supra), and noted that the said decision has no application to a case which does not relate to admission to an educational institution, but relates to securing employment by wrongly claiming benefit of reservation meant for Scheduled tribe. It has been laid down that proper course is to cancel the employment obtained on the basis of false certificate so that post may be filled up by a candidate who is entitled to benefit of reservation.

It is the plain duty of the constitutional Court to enforce the law. The doctrine of the separation of powers in a democracy demands no less."

20. In para 8 in Apurva Ashok Gokhale Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, Division Bench has further noted that though the Supreme Court had in certain cases issued directions to protect the admissions granted to a candidate despite the invalidation of the caste certificate having regard to the equities of the case, this was in exercise of the power under Article 142 of the Constitution. It also notes that this Division Bench judgment of this Court in Panwar's case has been subsequently followed by another Division Bench in Jagdevi Gurunath Khedgikar v. The Scheduled Tribe Certificate Security Committee Writ Petition 5624 of 2011 decided on 5 March 2012. Because of the specific statutory provisions which have been enacted by the State legislature, in Sections 10(1) and 10(3), the request to extend protection has not been accepted. This Bench has observed that the legislature has in its wisdom balanced two competing equities. The first equity is the equity of an individual student who has undergone a period of study albeit on the basis of a false caste certificate.