Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 3633 of 2006
PETITIONER:
Sandeep Subhash Parate
RESPONDENT:
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/08/2006
BENCH:
S.B. Sinha & Dalveer Bhandari
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9735/2005)
S.B. Sinha, J.
Leave granted.
The appellant claims himself to be a member of ’Halba’
community. ’Halba’ is a Scheduled Tribe. He obtained admission in
the courses of Bachelor of Engineering (Instrumentation Engineering)
in Pune University, (Respondent No.4), claiming himself to be
belonging to ’Halba’ a Scheduled Tribe community. According to the
appellant, the question as to whether ’Koshti-Halbas’ are members of
Scheduled Tribe or not had been authoritatively decided for the first
time in State of Maharashtra vs. Milind & Ors. [(2001) 1 SCC 4] and
in that view of the matter, he had represented himself to be a member of
Scheduled Tribe. Drawing our attention to the fact that even in Milind
(supra), this Court directed that those, who have completed their
courses from the universities, should be allowed to obtain degrees and
get the benefit thereof as general candidates, the appellant was also
entitled to a similar relief.
Indisputably, the Caste Scrutiny Committee constituted in terms
of the decision of this Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. vs.
Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development & Ors. [(1994) 6
SCC 241] invalidated the caste certificate granted in favour of the
appellant. In the writ petition filed by him thereagainst, an interim
order was passed in his favour, in terms whereof he obtained admission
in the course of Bachelor of Engineering (Instrumentation Engineering)
in the Government Engineering College, Pune, which is affiliated to the
respondent No.4-University. The High Court allowed the writ petition
and remitted the matter back to the Scrutiny Committee. His claim was
rejected by the Scrutiny Committee by an order dated 30th September,
2002. In a writ petition filed by him before the Nagpur Bench of the
Bombay High Court questioning the said order of 30th September, 2002,
no interim relief was granted, but, the appellant continued with his
studies. The said writ petition was dismissed for default, but, it was
restored. He completed his studies in the year 2004. He appeared at
the examination. An application was filed by him for a direction to
respondent No.4-University to supply him the degree along with the
marksheet. However, in the meantime, the writ petition itself was
dismissed on merits. Thus, no order was also passed on the said
application. The review application filed by the appellant herein has
been dismissed by the High Court by reason of the impugned order.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant merely
urged that this Court may issue a direction to the University to grant
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5
him the degree as he has completed his courses of studies in the
meantime.
Mr. Ravindra Kumar Adsure, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the State and Mr. Makrand D. Adkar, learned counsel
appearing for respondent No.4-University, however, submitted that the
appellant has not made out any case for obtaining any relief from the
High Court having failed to show his bona fide.
It was urged that as the appellant has played fraud on the
statutory authorities, he is not entitled to any equitable relief. Reliance
has been placed on Bank of India & Anr. vs. Avinash Mandivikar &
Ors. [(2005) 7 SCC 690] and Ram Saran vs. I.G. of Police, C.R.P.F.
& Ors. [2006 (2) SCALE 131].
It now stands admitted that the appellant did not belong to
’Halba’ community. He was a Koshti. On verification of his caste
certificate the Vigilance Cell found that his school records clearly
showed that the appellant belonged to the Koshti community.
The question as regards invalidation of caste certificate came up
consideration before this Court in Kumari Madhuri (supra), wherein
this Court directed the Central Government and the State Governments
to constitute Caste Scrutiny Committees to go into such issues as and
when they arise for consideration. Indisputably, a finding of fact has
been arrived at by the Caste Scrutiny Committee against the appellant
negativing his claim that he is a member of Scheduled Tribes.
However, the fact remains that he got himself admitted in view of an
interim order passed by the High Court. Indisputably, the question as to
whether ’Koshti-Halbas’ are members of Scheduled Tribe or not was
authoritatively answered only in Milind (supra), which was decided on
28th November, 2000, wherein it was observed :
"Respondent 1 joined the medical course for
the year 1985-86. Almost 15 years have passed by
now. We are told he has already completed the
course and may be he is practising as a doctor. In
this view and at this length of time it is for
nobody’s benefit to annul his admission. Huge
amount is spent on each candidate for completion
of medical course. No doubt, one Scheduled Tribe
candidate was deprived of joining medical course
by the admission given to Respondent 1. If any
action is taken against Respondent 1, it may lead to
depriving the service of a doctor to the society on
whom public money has already been spent. In
these circumstances, this judgment shall not affect
the degree obtained by him and his practising as a
doctor. But we make it clear that he cannot claim
to belong to the Scheduled Tribe covered by the
Scheduled Tribes Order. In other words, he cannot
take advantage of the Scheduled Tribes Order any
further or for any other constitutional purpose."
Yet again in R. Vishwanatha Pillai etc. vs. State of Kerala &
Ors. etc. [(2004) 2 SCC 105], a Three Judge Bench of this Court had
the occasion to deal with a similar issue. Following Milind (supra),
this Court held:
"In this case we find that the appellant had
joined Regional Engineering College in the year
1992. He completed the course of his studies in
the year 1996 under the interim orders of (sic the
High) Court which were subject to the final orders
to be passed in the writ petition. No purpose
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5
would be served in withholding the declaration of
the result on the basis of the examination already
taken by him or depriving him of the degree in
case he passes the examination. In terms of the
orders passed by the Constitution Bench of this
Court in State of Maharashtra v. Milind we direct
that his result be declared and he be allowed to
take his degree with the condition that he will not
be treated as a Scheduled Caste candidate in future
either in obtaining service or for any other benefits
flowing from the caste certificate obtained by him.
His caste certificate has been ordered to be
cancelled. Henceforth, he will be treated as a
person belonging to the general category for all
purposes."
A different opinion, however, was struck in Bank of India &
Anr. vs. Avinash D. Mandivikar & Ors. [(2005) 7 SCC 690], wherein
a Two Judge Bench of this Court distinguished Milind (supra) and
R. Vishwanatha Pillai (supra) stating that protection given therein
cannot be extended to an employee of a Bank and, thus, the factors
which weighed with this Court cannot be applied to the respondent
therein. The Court observed that in any event, if Respondent No.1 had
played fraud, he should not be allowed to get the benefits thereof. The
same learned Judge in Ram Saran (supra) held that leniency should not
be shown to a person who admittedly committed forgery.
The issue again came of up consideration in LIC of India vs.
Sushil [(2006) 2 SCC 471], wherein this Court remitted the matter back
to the High Court observing that :
"Before us it was urged on behalf of
Respondent 1 that in the State of Maharashtra at
the relevant time there were
resolutions/government orders which made the
respondent believe that there was no fraudulent
intention in claiming to be Halba. Mr. Lalit,
learned counsel for the respondent submitted that
none of these aspects (including various GRs) have
been considered. The High Court in the present
case proceeded on the basis as if mere filing of an
undertaking in the line suggested by the writ
petitioner was sufficient to bring the case under the
umbrella of the decision in Milind case. That is
clearly not so.
As the High Court has not considered the
matter in its proper perspective, except relying on
Milind case we think it appropriate to remit the
matter to the High Court for a fresh consideration
on merits of the case on the grounds, if any,
without being influenced by any observation in
this order."
Some peculiar characteristics exist in this case:
1) The appellant competed his substantial tenure as a
student under the interim orders passed by the High
Court.
2) No opportunity of hearing was given to him by the
Scrutiny Committee at the first instance and his first
writ petition was allowed.
3) Although, in the second writ petition, he could not
obtain any interim order, yet he was allowed to
continue his studies without any demur by the State and
University authorities.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5
4) He filed an application after completion of his studies
that respondent No.4-University should be directed to
issue to him the degree of Bachelor of Engineering. No
order was passed thereupon.
5) A review application was filed on the basis that the
Bench did not take into consideration the decision of
this Court in Milind (supra).
A person indisputably is not entitled to a relief only because an
interim order was passed in his favour, but the premise on which such
an interim order was passed would assume some significance in the
instant case in so far as a presumption may be drawn that prima facie
the appellant was not considered guilty of commission of fraud and the
possibility that the question in regard to his status as a member of
Scheduled Tribe as the issue as to whether ’Koshti-Halbas’ were
members of Scheduled Tribe had not been finally determined, was in
the mind of the court. {See for example, Employees State Insurance
Corporation vs. Distilleries & Chemical Mazdoor Union & Ors.
[2006 (7) SCALE 171].} The appellant took his admission in the year
1998, i.e., prior to the decision of this Court in Milind (supra). It is true
that he had obtained his admission in a professional institution not
purely on the basis of his merits but on the basis that he belonged to a
reserved category. It is also true that thereby he might have deprived a
genuine student of reserved category from obtaining admission, but, in
a case of this nature, what is necessary to bear in mind is the bona fide
or otherwise of the appellant. He might not have semblance of right as
was observed by the High Court but as the learned counsel for the
appellant states that he might have been under a bona fide belief that
Koshti-Halbas were members of a Scheduled Tribe.
It is not in dispute that the Bombay High Court held so.
However, as it appears from the decision of this Court in LIC (supra)
that the State might have also issued some Government orders making
such declaration. Indisputably, the conduct of a party assumes
significance in moulding the relief. This court, while exercising its
discretionary jurisdiction and to do complete justice between the parties
in terms of Article 142 of the Constitution of India, must consider all
relevant aspects of the matter, including the decisions of this Court.
The doctrine of proportionality emerging from the recent trend of
decisions in preference to the doctrine of Wednesbury unreasonableness
is also a factor which weighs with us. {See Teri Oat Estates (P) Ltd.
vs. U.T., Chandigarh & Ors. [(2004) 2 SCC 130] and A. Sudhakar
vs. Post Master General, Hyderabad & Anr. [2006 (3) SCALE
524].}
We do not find any lack of bona fide on the part of the appellant.
He, it will bear repetition to state, got admission in the professional
course as far back in the year 1998. For about last three years, he had
not been able to receive his degree of Engineering, although, he
pursued his studies after he had passed class 12th examination. Just like
Medical Education, the State also incurs a heavy expenditure in
imparting other professional education like Engineering. We, in the
peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, are not inclined to go into
the question as regards purported commission of fraud by the appellant,
particularly, when the University admitted him without any demur
whatsoever. We are doing so having regard to the doctrine of
proportionality. The appellant has suffered a lot. He might not be
entirely responsible therefor. He might have been under a bona fide
belief that he comes within the purview of notified category. We,
therefore, albeit with much reluctance accept the fervent and
impassionate plan made by the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant that he be allowed to obtain the degree. The same shall,
however, be subject to payment of Rs.1 lakh in favour of the State of
Maharashtra so as to recompense the State to some extent the amount
spent on him for imparting education as a reserved category candidate.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5
Such payment must be made within three months from this date. On
filing satisfactory proof of the deposit of such an amount, the
respondent No.4 shall immediately issue the degree in his favour. The
appellant shall not claim any benefit flowing from the caste certificate
obtained by him, which shall stand cancelled. In future, for all
purposes he will be treated to be a person belonging to the general
category.
The appeal is allowed to the extent mentioned hereinbefore and
on the aforementioned terms. No costs.