BRIJBHANSINGH Vs. DIRECTOR EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE SCHEME

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ petition in which the petitioner has challenged the order of the respondent. No. 2 invalidating his caste certificate issued by the Executive Magistrate in his favour. Briefly the facts are that after obtaining the caste certificate from the Executive Magistrate as per the procedure prevailing at that time the petitioner made an application for appointment to the post of Junior Administrative Officer in the directorate of Employees' State Insurance Scheme pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (for short "the M. P. S. C. ") He made the application for the post in the reserved quota for V. J. N. T. as he claimed that he belonged to Rajput Bhamta (Denotified) Tribe. He was selected and appointed in the post of Junior administrative Officer against the reserved post for V. J. N. T. on probation on 11. 7. 1977. Although some complaints were made in regard to his caste certificate, the respondent No. 1 rejected the said complaints and confirmed him in the post of Junior Administrative Officer on 24. 7. 1979.

(2.) IT appears from the return of the respondent No. 1 that the case of the petitioner was being considered for promotion to class I post as according to the roaster the Class I post to be filled in was of V. J. N. T. In 1982, therefore, the respondent No. 1 asked the petitioner to submit the copies of his caste certificate and other documents in support of his caste. He accordingly submitted certain documents to the respondent No. 1 on 9. 2. 1983 the respondent No. 1 asked him to appear before the Scrutiny Committee, i. e. , the Committee constituted by the Government for verification of caste certificate as per the Government Resolution dated 3. 6. 1980, which was also the Committee to verify the caste certificate of denazified tribes as per the Government Resolution dated 6. 5. 1980- On 15. 2. 1983 the said Scrutiny Committee gave to the petitioner a questionnaire to be answered by him. Accordingly the petitioner answered the questionnaire and also sub mitted some documents on 21. 6. 1983. The Scrutiny Committee thereafter met on 27. 9. 1983 and submitted its report to the respondent No. 2. By its report it held that the petitioner is Kshatriya Rajput and not Rajput Bahama. Accordingly, his caste certificate was invalidated. On 16. 11. 1983 the respondent No. 1 informed the petitioner that as per the intimation received from the respondent No. 2, his caste certificate showing him Rajput Bhamta is treated as invalid. It is the aforesaid order of the respondent No. 1 treating his caste certificate as invalid, which the petitioner has challenged in this writ petition.

(3.) IT is not necessary for us to decide in this writ petition the question whether the Government Resolution No. CBC1960/1961-K. 5 dated May 6, 1980 can be retrospectively made applicable to the case of the petitioner, when at the time he was appointed and also when he was confirmed no such procedure such as reference to the Scrutiny Committee or verification of the caste certificate, was applicable. This is because a statement is made on behalf of the respondents that by verification of his caste certificate what was intended was to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to class I post reserved for V. J. N. T. and not to invalidate his original appointment as Junior Administrative Officer. In view of the above statement,. his appointment as Junior Administrative Officer is not to be invalid dated and hence it is not necessary to consider the question whether the aforesaid Government Resolution is retrospective in operation or not, although on merits its prima facie appears that the said Government Resolution is not retrospective in operation.