Bombay High Court Grants Protection of Service to Employee Despite Invalidation of Halba Scheduled Tribe Caste Claim. Court Follows Full Bench Decision in Arun v. State of Maharashtra to Protect Service Subject to Conditions Based on Date of Appointment.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 98
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Vijay s/o Ramaji Hedaoo, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the order dated 30.10.1998 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur, which rejected his claim of belonging to the Halba Scheduled Tribe and cancelled and confiscated his caste certificate. The petitioner was employed with the Defence Electronics Research Laboratory, Hyderabad. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel, on instructions, did not press the merits of the caste claim but sought protection of service in light of various Supreme Court and High Court judgments, particularly the Full Bench decision of the Bombay High Court in Arun s/o Vishwanath v. State of Maharashtra and others, 2015 (1) Mh.L.J. 457, dated 22.12.2014. The Full Bench had answered that the relief of protection of service after invalidation of caste claim can be granted by the High Court based on the decisions in Kavita Solunke v. State of Maharashtra (2012) 8 SCC 430 and Shalini v. New English High School Association (2013) 16 SCC 526. The Full Bench also laid down guidelines regarding the consequences of invalidation depending on the date of appointment: (i) for appointments finalized before the decision in Milind's case on 28.11.2000, mere invalidation does not entail withdrawal of benefits or discharge; (ii) for appointments secured between 28.11.2000 and 18.10.2001, benefits can be withdrawn depending on terms of employment; (iii) for appointments after 18.10.2001 (when the relevant Act came into force), benefits can be withdrawn immediately upon invalidation; (iv) protection is available to Koshti, Halba Koshti, and Special Backward Class on same terms; and (v) claims of Nomadic Tribes, Vimukta Jatis, and OBC shall be decided per R. Unnikrishnan v. V.K. Mahanudevan (2014) 4 SCC 43. The Court, without entering into the merits of the caste claim, disposed of the petition by directing that the petitioner's services be protected and not be disturbed on the ground of invalidation of the caste claim, subject to the conditions laid down in the Full Bench judgment. The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the caste claim.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Caste Claim Invalidation - Protection of Service - The petitioner's claim of belonging to Halba Scheduled Tribe was rejected by the Scrutiny Committee on 30.10.1998, cancelling the caste certificate. The petitioner sought protection of service. The High Court, following the Full Bench decision in Arun v. State of Maharashtra (2015) 1 Mh.L.J. 457, held that protection of service can be granted upon invalidation of caste claim based on the decisions in Kavita Solunke v. State of Maharashtra (2012) 8 SCC 430 and Shalini v. New English High School Association (2013) 16 SCC 526. The Court directed that the petitioner's services be protected and not be disturbed on the ground of invalidation of caste claim, subject to the conditions laid down in the Full Bench judgment. (Paras 4-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to protection of service after the invalidation of his caste claim as a Halba Scheduled Tribe by the Scrutiny Committee.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner's services be protected and not be disturbed on the ground of invalidation of the caste claim, subject to the conditions laid down in the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Arun s/o Vishwanath v. State of Maharashtra and others, 2015 (1) Mh.L.J. 457. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Protection of service can be granted by High Court upon invalidation of caste claim based on Kavita Solunke and Shalini decisions
  • Mere invalidation does not entail automatic withdrawal of benefits or discharge from employment for appointments finalized before Milind's case (28.11.2000)
  • Benefits obtained between 28.11.2000 and 18.10.2001 can be withdrawn depending on terms of employment
  • Benefits obtained after 18.10.2001 can be withdrawn immediately upon invalidation
  • Protection available to Koshti
  • Halba Koshti
  • and Special Backward Class on same terms
  • Claims of Nomadic Tribes
  • Vimukta Jatis
  • and OBC to be decided per R. Unnikrishnan
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (BOM) (01) 77

Writ Petition No.625 of 1999

2015-01-06

Anoop V. Mohta, A.R. Joshi

Mr. R.M. Bhangade for petitioner, Mr. Jayant Mokadam for respondent no.1

Vijay s/o Ramaji Hedaoo

The Director, Research and Development Organisation, Defence Electronics Research Laboratory, Hyderabad; The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur; Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, New Delhi

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging the order of the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee rejecting the petitioner's claim of belonging to Halba Scheduled Tribe and cancelling the caste certificate.

Remedy Sought

Protection of service despite invalidation of caste claim.

Filing Reason

The petitioner's caste claim was rejected by the Scrutiny Committee, and he sought to protect his service from being terminated on that ground.

Previous Decisions

The Scrutiny Committee passed an order on 30.10.1998 rejecting the petitioner's claim of Halba Scheduled Tribe and cancelling the caste certificate.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to protection of service after invalidation of his caste claim by the Scrutiny Committee.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel sought protection of service based on Supreme Court and High Court judgments, particularly the Full Bench decision in Arun v. State of Maharashtra.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court can grant protection of service upon invalidation of caste claim based on the decisions in Kavita Solunke and Shalini, as held by the Full Bench in Arun v. State of Maharashtra. The protection is subject to conditions depending on the date of appointment relative to Milind's case and the coming into force of the relevant Act.

Judgment Excerpts

We are inclined to dispose of the present writ petition in view of the following facts and circumstances. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, however, seeks protection of service as contemplated under various Supreme Court judgments as well as High Courts judgments which are dealt with by a full bench of this High Court in Arun s/o Vishwanath .vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 2015 (1) Mh.L.J. 457 dated 22.12.2014.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.625 of 1999 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the order dated 30.10.1998 of the Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur, which rejected his claim of belonging to Halba Scheduled Tribe and cancelled his caste certificate. The petition was taken out from the final hearing board and heard finally by consent of parties on 06.01.2015.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition of Accountant Seeking Pay Revision Under Standard Code Rules. College Under Social Justice Department Not Covered by Rules Applicable to Higher Education Department.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Grants Protection of Service to Employee Despite Invalidation of Halba Scheduled Tribe Caste Claim. Court Follows Full Bench Decision in Arun v. State of Maharashtra to Protect Service Subject to Conditions Based on Date of Appointm...