Summary
An employee joined Bhilai Steel Plant in 1995 as a Management Trainee against a Scheduled Tribe vacancy on a 1987 'Halba' certificate. In 2015 the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, after notice which he did not attend, found he belonged to the Halba/Koshti community, an OBC in Chhattisgarh, and cancelled the certificate; his services were terminated and benefits forfeited. The Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed his challenge because he had not questioned the Committee's finding, but the Chhattisgarh High Court, applying State of Maharashtra v. Milind, set aside the termination with seniority and back wages. The Supreme Court allowed the employer's appeal. Milind protected only the doctor litigant in that case and was clarified in Union of India v.
Issues
- Whether a person appointed before 28.11.2000 against a Scheduled Tribe vacancy on a caste certificate later cancelled by the Caste Scrutiny Committee is entitled to continue in service on the strength of State of Maharashtra v. Milind.
- Whether termination without a show-cause notice was vitiated where the employee did not challenge the Scrutiny Committee's adverse finding, avoided its proceedings, and did not claim to belong to the Scheduled Tribe.
- What consequences follow for emoluments already drawn and for pensionary benefits.
Provisions considered
- Articles 16(4) and 342 (reservation for Scheduled Tribes) and Articles 226 and 14 (natural justice), Constitution of IndiaA person not belonging to a Scheduled Tribe cannot usurp a post reserved for it; the High Court should not have granted equitable relief by invoking natural justice when an opportunity would have been futile, the certificate having been cancelled and the finding unchallenged. (¶¶ 12, 15, 16)
- Protection of pre-28.11.2000 appointees and its withdrawal, Chhattisgarh Government circulars dated 01.10.2011 and 11.01.2016The 2011 circular protecting persons wrongly appointed as ST before the Milind judgment was cancelled by the 2016 circular in light of Dattatray; the High Court disregarded the later circular, which the employee never challenged. (¶¶ 6.2, 13, 14)
Held
- Milind granted relief only to the medical doctor before the Court in the larger interest of society; Dattatray clarified that it has no application to securing employment by wrongly claiming the benefit of ST reservation, where the person deprives a legitimate ST candidate and the proper course is to cancel the appointment. The High Court misapplied Milind to a Management Trainee. (¶¶ 9, 11, 12, 15)
- The Chhattisgarh High Court in Dinesh Kumar Sonkusre had itself held that protection extends only to those who were actually Halba-Koshti or Koshti of Madhya Pradesh/Chhattisgarh before 28.11.2000 and obtained ST certificates bona fide, not to those who obtained false certificates by misrepresentation; the 2016 circular is valid read in that light. (¶ 13)
- The Scrutiny Committee's finding of 15.07.2015 that the employee is not Halba ST remains unchallenged; he avoided the Committee's proceedings despite notice, does not claim to be ST, and never challenged the clarificatory circular. He is therefore disentitled to equitable relief on the ground of long service, an opportunity of hearing would be futile, and as an OBC he cannot be retained in an ST post. Emoluments paid shall not be recovered, but he is disentitled to pensionary benefits by virtue of the wrongful appointment. (¶¶ 15, 16)
Result
Appeal allowed; the Chhattisgarh High Court's judgment of 09.01.2017 setting aside the termination set aside; the respondent, being OBC, cannot be retained in a Scheduled Tribe post; emoluments already paid not to be recovered, but no pensionary benefits payable. Parties to bear their own costs.