DATTU S/O NAMDEV THAKURversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

                [2011] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 475


               DATIU S/O NAMDEV THAKUR                               A
                                v.
          STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
         (Special Leave Petition (C) 3314 of 2010)
                    DECEMBER 07, 2011
                                                                     B
 [ALTAMAS KABIR, SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND J.
              CHELAMESWAR, JJ.]

     Social status certificate: Scheduled tribe certificate issued
to petitioner-father and petitioners-son and daughter -              C
Cancellation of, by the Caste Scrutiny Committee - High
Court upheld the decision of Committee - On appeal, held:
The decision of Caste Scrutiny Committee and High Court
is not disturbed - However, whatever advantage the
petitioners had derived on the basis of their 'Caste                 D
Certificates', may not be disturbed and the cancellation of their
respective 'Caste Certificates' would not deprive them of the
benefits which they have already enjoyed - However, none
of the petitioners would be entitled to take any further
advantage of reservation in future, either for studies or for        E
employment - If the petitioners have obtained any
concession by way of reduction in fees, as a reserved
candidate, they would have to make good the same by paying
the difference in fees that is being paid by general candidates
- The results of the petitioners would be published.                 F
     The case of the petitioners was that the Caste
Certificates granted to them on 7th June, 2001 by the
competent authorities were invalidated by the Caste
Scrutiny Committee mainly on the ground that they were
unable to satisfy the Committee that they belonged to the            G
'Thakur' tribe recorded as a Scheduled Tribe at Serial
no.44 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Tribes list and that
the petitioners were also unable to prove by way of
affinity test that they belonged to the Thakur Scheduled
                            475                                      H
    476    SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R.


A Tribe. The petitioners filed the writ petitions challenging
  the cancellation of the 'Caste Certificates'. The High Court
  dismissed the writ petitions. The Special Leave Petitions
  were filed challenging the order of the High Court.
          Dismissing the Special Leave Petitions, the Court
B
       HELD: 1. The findings of the Caste Scrutiny
  Committee, as also that of the High Court is accepted.
  However, the fact is that reference was made to the Caste
  Scrutiny Committee in 2009, i.e. nine years after the
c certificates had been issued, and there is no proper
  explanation for such delay. The petitioner in the first writ
  petition was allowed by the respondents to continue in
  service and also by virtue of orders passed by the High
  Court. Similarly, the petitioners in the other two writ
0 petitions have continued their studies after having
  obtained certain benefits from their 'Caste Certificates'.
  The petitioner in the second Special Leave Petition who
  is the son of the petitioner in the main Special Leave
  Petition, has in the meantime, appeared for the
E B.Pharmacy examination but his results have not been
  declared. Similarly, daughter of the petitioner in the main
  Special Leave Petition, who is the petitioner in the other
  Special Leave Petition, has appeared for the
  B.Ed.examination and her result is also to be declared.
  Whatever advantage the three petitioners in the three
F Special Leave Petitions, might have derived on the basis
  of their 'Caste Certificates', would not be disturbed and
  the cancellation of their respective 'Caste Certificates'
  would not deprive them of the benefits which they have
  already enjoyed. However, none of the three petitioners
G in the three respective Special Leave Petitions, would be
  entitled to take any further advantage of reservation in
  future, either for studies or for employment. However, if
  the petitioners in the 2nd and 3rd Special Leave Petition, .
  have obtained any concession by way of reduction in
H fees, as a reserved candidate, they will have to make good
     DATIU S/O NAMDEV THAKUR v. STATE OF                     477
            MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
the same by paying the difference in fees that is being             A
paid by general candidates. Such payment has to be
made within a period of six months and in default of such
payment, this order will cease to have any effect. The
results of the 2nd and 3rd petitioners shall, therefore, be
published in view of this judgment. [Para 9, 10] [479-F-H;          B
480-A-C]
     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: SLP (Civil) No. 3314
of 2010.
      From the Judgment & Order dated 14.12.2009 of the Hgih        C
Court of Judicature of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad in Writ
Petition No. 7813 of 2009.
                             WITH
SLP (C) Nos. 3370 & 3365 of 2010.
                                                                    D
    Anandbhushan Kanade. Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar,
Anjani Kumar Jha for the Petitioner.
   Shankar Chillarge, Adv., Asha Gopalan Nair, lrshad
Ahmad for the Respondents.
                                                                    E
    The following Judgment of the Court was delivered
     ALTAMAS KABIR, J. 1. Special Leave Petition(C)Nos.
3314, 3365 and 3370, all of 2010, which are on board today,
all arise out of the judgment and final order dated 14th
December, 2009, passed by the Aurangabad Bench of the               F
Bombay High Court in Writ Petition Nos.7813 of 2009, 8048
of 2009 and 7289 of 2009.
     2. The petitioner in SLP(C)No.3314 of 2010, is the father
of the petitioners in the other two Special Leave Petitions, one
being the son and the other being the daughter of the petitioner,   G
Dattu Thakur, son of Namdev Thakur. In all these cases, the
grievance is common since the 'Caste Certificates' granted to
them on 7th June, 2001, by the competent authorities were
invalidated by the Caste Scrutiny Committee by its orders dated
4th September, 2009 and 24th September, 2009.                       H
    478   SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R.


A       3. The Caste Certificates issued to the petitioners were
  invalidated mainly on the ground that they were unable to satisfy
  the Caste Scrutiny Committee that they belong to the Thakur'
  tribe, which is recorded as a Scheduled Tribe at Serial No.44
  of the Maharashtra Scheduled Tribes List. The Caste Scrutiny
B Committee also came to the finding that the School Leaving
  Certificate of the father of the petitioner in SLP(C)No.3314 of
  2010, did not really support the case of the petitioners who, in
  any event, had also failed in the affinity test. It was submitted
  that the documents tendered by them did not conform to their
c claim. Furthermore, the petitioners were also unable to prove
  by way of affinity test that they belong to the Thakur Scheduled
  Tribe.

       4. Cancellation of the 'Caste Certificates' issued to the
  petitioners on the basis of the report of the Caste Scrutiny
D Committee, was challenged by the petitioners in the aforesaid
  writ petitions, in which the High Court upheld the findings of the
  Caste Scrutiny Committee.

      5. As indicated hereinabove, the Special Leave Petitions
E have been filed against the said order of the High Court.

       6. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s), as
  well as the State of Maharashtra, we are of the view that even
  if we are to accept the findings of the Caste Scrutiny
  Committee, as also that of the High Court, we cannot ignore
F the various circumstances that have int~rvened between the
  issuance of the 'Caste Certificates' and the cancellation thereof.
  In fact, reference was made to the Caste Scrutiny Committee
  in 2009, i.e. nine years after the certificates had been issued,
  and there is no proper explanation for such delay. On the other
G hand, the petitioner in the first writ petition has been allowed
  by the respondents to continue in service and also by virtue of
  orders passed by the High Court. Similarly, the petitioners in
  the other two writ petitions have continued their studies after
  having obtained certain benefits from their 'Caste Certificates'.
H
    DATTU S/O NAMDEV THAKUR v. STATE OF                       479
  MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. [ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]
We are now informed by Mr. Kanade, learned senior advocate,          A
appearing for the petitioner(s), that the petitioner in the second
Special Leave Petition, Amol, who is the son of Dattu Thakur,
who is the petitioner in the main Special Leave Petition, has
in the meantime, appeared for the B.Pharmacy examination but
his results have not been declared. Similarly, Pratibha, daughter    B
of Dattu Thakur, who is the petitioner in the other Special Leave
Petition, has appeared for the B.Ed.examination and her result
is also to be declared.

      7. In support of the case of the petitioner(s), an order       C
passed by another Bench of this Court in C.A.No.7411 of 2010
(Swati Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.), on 6th September,
2010, was brought to our notice, wherein in similar
circumstances, the Court while dismissing the civil appeal,
directed that the benefits that had already been enjoyed by the
candidate, and the degree obtained by her in the BOS course,         D
which she had completed, would continue. The Court further
directed that she would not be entitled to any further benefits
under the 'Caste Certificates' issued to her and that whatever
advantage she may have obtained by way of payment of fees
at a reduced rate, were to be made up by her by paying the           E
difference.

     8. We are of the view that this being a case of a similar
nature, the decision of the said Bench may also be applied to
the facts of this case.                                              F

     9. Accordingly, while dismissing all the three Special
Leave Petitions, we direct that whatever advantage the three
petitioners in the three Special Leave Petitions, may have
derived on the basis of their 'Caste Certificates', shall not be
disturbed and the cancellation of their respective 'Caste            G
Certificates' will not deprive them of the benefits which they
have already enjoyed. However, we also make it clear that none
of the three petitioners in the three respective Special Leave
Petitions, will be entitled to take any further advantage of
                                                                     H
   480     SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R.


A reservation in future, either for studies or for employment.
  Following the judgment in Swati's case, we also direct that if
  the petitioners in the 2nd and 3rd Special Leave Petition, have
  obtained any concession by way of reduction in fees, as a
  reserved candidate, they will have to make good the same by
s paying the difference in fees that is being paid by general
  candidates. Such payment has to be made within a period of
  six months and in default of such payment, this order will cease
  to have any effect.

       10. The results of the 2nd and 3rd petitioners shall,
C therefore, be published in view of this judgment.

          11. There will be no orders as to costs.

   D.G.                        Special Leave Petitions dismissed.