Janki Meena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1941 MP

                                     1
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                 BEFORE
                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,
                              CHIEF JUSTICE
                                    &
           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
                         ON THE 11th OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                        WRIT APPEAL No. 101 of 2022

         Between:-
         JANKI MEENA, W/O LATE BHABUTILAL MEENA,
         AGED    ABOUT    42   YEARS, OCCUPATION:
         HOUSEWIFE, R/O 494, KALIKA NAGAR, BABAI
         ROAD, HOSHANGABAD, DISTT. HOSHANGABAD
         (M.P.)

                                                                     .....APPELLANT
         (BY SHRI SANJAYRAM TAMRAKAR, ADVOCATE)

         AND

1.       STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH THE
         SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES,
         MANTRLAYA, VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (M.P.)

2.       D I R E C T O R , DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES,
         MADHYA PRADESH, BHADBHADA FISHERY AREA,
         BHOPAL (M.P.)

3.       COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF TRIBAL
         D EVELOPM EN T, MADHYA PRADESH, BHOPAL
         (M.P.)

4.       HIGH POWER CASTE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
         (CONSTITUTED AS PER THE JUDGMENT OF
         MADHURI PATIL), THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, IN
         THE OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT
         OF   TRIBAL     DEVELOPMENT, MANTRALAYA
         VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (M.P.)

                                                                  .....RESPONDENTS
         (BY SHRI ANKIT AGRAWAL, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
                        (Heard through Video Conferencing)
      This appeal coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravi
Malimath, Chief Justice passed the following:
                                      ORDER

Aggrieved by the order dated 11.01.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in dismissing the Writ Petition No.7560 of 2017, the petitioner is in appeal.

The case of the writ petitioner is that a caste certificate was issued to him on 16.03.1988. Thereafter he was appointed as Assistant Fishery Officer on 14.07.1993. He was promoted on the post of Assistant Director vide order dated

02.12.2004 and was further promoted on the post of Deputy Director, Fisheries vide order dated 14.06.2015. Thereafter the proceedings were initiated with regard to the validity of the caste certificate issued to him on 16.03.1988. He was in possession of a caste certificate belonging to caste Meena which is considered as a

Scheduled Tribe. He was accordingly issued a caste certificate. Thereafter, in the proceedings before the Caste Scrutiny Committee, it was found that the said certificate is incorrect. Accordingly, an order was issued declaring the caste certificate to be invalid. Questioning the same, the instant writ petition was filed.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the writ petitioner passed away. His legal representatives were brought on record. An application is said to have been filed seeking for grant of pensionary benefits on the death of the original writ petitioner.

The learned Single Judge by the impugned order came to the conclusion that since the caste certificate has been held to be invalid, no relief could be granted to the petitioner. It was held that the legal representative of the writ petitioner cannot get the benefit of pension as that would be contrary to the principle of disgorgement of gains which has been obtained illegally on the basis of a forged or fraudulent caste certificate. That if the legal representative of the petitioner was permitted to have pensionary benefits, then that will amount to continuing a wrong which has been purported by petitioner by getting reservation in a job on the basis of a forged caste certificate.

On considering the contentions, we are of the view that appropriate interference is called for.

The caste certificate of the petitioner was withdrawn. He challenged the same by filing the instant writ petition. During the pendency of the writ petition, he passed away in harness. Therefore, the writ petition should have been dismissed as having abated. On the contrary, based on the application filed by the legal representative for getting pensionary benefits, the findings have been recorded that he has obtained the job by using forged document. The notional consequences of obtaining a job by forged documents were applied against the legal representatives of the writ petitioner. This, we find, may not be appropriate.

In a given situation, after a caste certificate has been withdrawn, it is for the employer to take a decision with regard to the termination of the said employee or not. Various factors would have to be considered by the employer before such a termination is effected. It cannot be said that the termination of an employee is automatic on the basis of the withdrawal of the caste certificate. Therefore, these are issues to be decided by the employer. No such decision has been taken by the employer till date in view of the fact that the petition was filed immediately on withdrawal of the caste certificate. Probably, there was no opportunity even for the employer to take a decision in view of the fact that after the filing of the writ

petition an interim order was granted staying the execution of that order. The impugned order withdrawing the caste certificate was dated 01.04.2017 whereas an interim order was granted by this Court on 19.05.2017. Therefore, probably there was no time for the employer to have recourse to further proceedings subsequent to cancellation of the caste certificate. Therefore, we are of the view that the petition ought to have been dismissed solely on the ground of having abated. Necessarily, it is the responsibility of the employer to take a decision subsequent to the withdrawal of the caste certificate. Based on a decision, that would be taken by the employer regarding the deceased, the petitioner will be entitled to question the same in a manner known to law.

For all the aforesaid reasons, the writ appeal is allowed. The order dated 11.01.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.7560 of 2017 is set aside. The findings recorded by the learned Single Judge are set aside. The writ petition is dismissed as having abated. It is left open to the employer to take a decision with regard to the consequences of the withdrawal of the caste certificate.

Pending interlocutory application (I.A. No.1337 of 2022) is disposed off.

                      (RAVI MALIMATH)                         (PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV)
                        CHIEF JUSTICE                                    JUDGE
         psm
Digitally signed by
PREM SHANKAR
MISHRA
Date: 2022.02.11
18:08:56 +05'30'