Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bharat Singh Batham vs Life Insurance Corporation Of ... on 10 November, 2021
Author: Rohit Arya
1 RP-836-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
RP No. 836 of 2021
(BHARAT SINGH BATHAM Vs LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS)
Gwalior, Dated : 10-11-2021
Shri D.P.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner, a Class-III employee, superannuated on 31st of
December, 2020, is before this Court seeking review of the order
dt.07.09.2021 passed in W.A.No.390/2021. The Coordinate Bench, of which
one of us (Hon.Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal) was a Member, has
confirmed the final order dt.16th of March 2020 passed in
W.P.No.14571/2020.
The learned counsel for the petitioner while criticizing both the orders
contends that there is a patent jurisdictional error committed by both the
Courts while dismissing the Writ Petition filed against issuance of show cause
notice dt.4th of September 2020. By the impugned show cause notice, the
petitioner was called upon by the disciplinary authority to show cause against
initiation of disciplinary proceeding purportedly on the ground of having
procured appointment on the basis of forged caste certificate. It is the
contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the subject matter of
verification of caste certificate was pending consideration before the High
Power Committee constituted in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in
the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. Addl Commissioner (AIR 1995
SC 94), therefore, until and unless said committee had submitted a report
about the status of caste certificate, both the courts could not have entered
into the merits of the alleged caste certificate and record a finding that the
caste certificate obtained by the petitioner was a forged caste certificate.
According to him, it is High Power Committee having exclusive jurisdiction to
address on the question of veracity and eligibility in the context of a caste
certificate of a given person. During pendency of the Writ intra Court Appeal
before the Coordinate Bench, the petitioner had reached the age of
superannuation. However, his pensionary dues have been forfeited on
2 RP-836-2021
account of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, by order dt.29th of
July 2021.
Now, after order is passed by the Division Bench on 07.09.2021 (order
under review), the petitioner's right to challenge the aforesaid order of
forfeiture of post retiral dues stands foreclosed and therefore petitioner seeks
review of the order passed by the coordinate Bench.
This Court has given due consideration to the submissions advanced
by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The review jurisdiction of a Court is
limited in nature. This Court can not substitute its view for that of a
Coordinate Bench if the order is assailed to be legally not sustainable or
suffers from the vice of jurisdictional error. Of course, if certain material
facts/documents having substantial bearing in the outcome of the proceeding,
have escaped consideration, the same may be taken into consideration. That
is not the case in hand. Learned counsel has tried to persuade this Court that
the impugned order is jurisdictionally bad in law in view of Madhuri Patil's
case (supra), inasmuch as pending decision of High Power Committee, no
finding could have been recorded by the Courts as regards the veracity of the
caste certificate. We are afraid, such contentions can be countenanced in the
review jurisdiction of the coordinate Bench.
Hence, the review petition sans merits and is accordingly dismissed.
However, the petitioner is always at liberty to take recourse to law before
appropriate forum.
(ROHIT ARYA) (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
SP
SANJEEV
KUMAR PHANSE
2021.11.11
17:49:10 +05'30'
