Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have submitted that all the petitioners have secured employment prior to 28.11.2000 on which date the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court delivered the judgment in Milind' s case (supra) over ruling the judgment of Division Bench of the Bombay High Court delivered on 4.9.1985. The petitioners had obtained the caste/tribe certificates showing them to be belonging Halba scheduled tribe. However said certificates are invalidated by orders passed by the Caste Scrutiny Committee as stated herein above. It is contended that based on the observations made in para 36 of the judgment in Milind's case (supra) various orders are passed by this Court extending protection to the appointments interpreting the said observations as laying down the law. Our attention is also invited to many orders passed by the Supreme Court as well, protecting the appointments and/or admissions granted to the candidates. The basic issue which arises for consideration is as to whether the observations made/directions issued by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra V/s Milind is declaration of law by Supreme Court which shall be binding on all Courts or whether the said observations are in exercise of discretionary powers vested under article 142 of the Constitution of India. If the observations in para 36 are held to be law declared by the Supreme Court the present petitioner' s appointments/admissions would stand protected. However if the said observations/directions are held to be issued pursuant to the exercise of jurisdiction under article 142 which power is only available to the Supreme Court, the petitioner's appointments/admissions cannot be protected by this Court. Let us examine the Supreme Court judgments which favour the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, interpreting the judgment in State of Maharashtra v/s Milind. The first judgment is in the case of R.Vishwanatha Pillai v/s State of Kerala & Ors., reported in (2004) 20 SCC 105. In this case the Supreme Court was considering the cases of appointments so also admissions which were disposed of by a common judgment by the High Court. Dealing with the appointments the Supreme Court has held that a person procuring an appointment in the post meant for reserved category candidate on the basis of false caste certificate is not a person holding a civil post within the meaning of article 311 and as such the appointment has been held to be no appointment in the eye of law. While dealing with admissions the Supreme Court observed in para 28 thus:

caste of Halba or not, this question was decided by the Bombay High Court and it was held that Koshtis is sub-caste of Halba (ST) and every Koshtis may be treated as a Halba (1987 Maharashtra Law Journal 572). This matter came up in special leave petition before this Court and this Court reserved the judgment and took the view that the Koshtis is not a sub-caste of Halba. However, while disposing of that appeal their Lordships said in last two lines which reads:

"5. In Milind, the question was whether the first respondent who belonged to `Koshti' caste could claim the benefit of ST reservation on the ground that it was a sub-tribe of `Halba' (Entry No.19 in Part IX of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 195). This Court held that `Koshti' was not a part of the Scheduled Tribe of Halba and that the entires in the Scheduled Tribes Order could not be amended or expanded by any Authority. As a consequence, the State's appeal was allowed and the claim of first respondent therein that he belonged to a scheduled tribe was rejected. Having allowed the State's appeal, this Court moulded the relief in exercise of its power under Article 142 by permitting the first respondent therein to retain the benefit of his degree (for the reasons extracted above). Vishwanatha Pillai merely followed Milind.

In Milind, there was a bona fide doubt as to whether `Halba-

Koshti' could be considered as `Halba'.

                                            In Vishwanatha Pillai,

    the   candidate's
                        caste   certificate   was     cancelled  merely     as   a




                                                                               
    consequence   of   cancellation   of   his   father'
                                                       s   caste   certificate.