Supreme Court of India
REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIAversusMADHULIKA GURUPRASAD DAHIR AND ORS.
- Citation
- 2008 INSC 867
- Decided
- 25 July 2008
- Disposal
- Case Allowed
- Bench
- C K THAKKER
Holding
An appointment obtained by a false caste certificate constitutes fraud and cannot be saved by equitable considerations; therefore the termination of the employee’s services was justified.
Summary
The employee was appointed in 1981 to a post reserved for Scheduled Tribes on the basis of a caste certificate that was later found to be false. The Government‑issued directive of 1990 required public‑sector banks to verify such certificates, leading to the employee’s case being referred to a Scrutiny Committee, which after two inquiries cancelled the certificate and confirmed the employee did not belong to the Thakur Scheduled Tribe. The bank terminated her services in 2003, but the High Court set aside the termination on the ground of the long delay in verification, ordering reinstatement without back‑wages. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the appointment was obtained by fraud, that equity cannot be invoked to save a fraudulent appointment, and that the delay in verification does not validate the false certificate. Consequently, the termination was upheld and the High Court’s order was reversed.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in referring the caste certificate to the Scrutiny Committee and the Committee’s delayed verification vitiates the termination order when the certificate is ultimately found false.
- Whether an employee who has rendered long service can be protected by equity despite having been appointed on a false caste certificate.
Subjects
service lawterminationreservationscheduled tribefalse caste certificatefraudequitypublic sector bankscrutiny committeeappointment
Judgment
[2008) 11 S.C.R. 319
...
REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA A
v.
MADHULIKA GURUPRASAD DAHIR AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No.4636 of 2008)
JULY 25, 2008
B
[C.K. THAKKER AND D.K. JAIN, JJ.]
Service Law - Termination - For usurping post reserved
for Scheduled Tribe candidate by producing false caste cer-
tificate - Justification of - On facts, held: Justified - The ter- c
minated employee cannot plead equity nor the Court would
be justified to exercise equity jurisdiction in favour of such
terminated employee merely because she had worked on the
post for over twenty years - The fact that caste certificate of the
terminated employee was referred to the Scrutiny Committee
D
for verification after ten years of her joining the service and a
- ~ long time was taken by the Scrutiny Committee to verify the
same was inconsequential inasmuch as delay on both the
counts did not validate the caste certificate and the conse-
quent illegal appointment - Equity jurisdiction - Non-exer-
cise of E
Fraud - Held: Is anathema to all equitable principles -
Any affair tainted with fraud cannot be perpetuated or saved
by application of any equitable doctrine.
The First Respondent claimed to be belonging to F
"Thakur Scheduled Tribe" and got employment in Appel-
lant-public sector bank, in 1981 against a post reserved
for "Scheduled Tribes", on the basis of a caste certificate
issued to her in 1979. Pursuant to instructions issued by
-
"- _.
the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department G
of Economic Affairs in 1990, directing all the public sec-
tor banks/financial institutions to get the caste certificates
of the existing employees, belonging to various sched-
uled tribes, verified, the caste certificate filed by First Re-
319 H
320 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 11 S.C.R.
A spondent was referred to Committee for Scrutiny and Veri-
fication of Tribe Claims (Respondent No.2). The Scrutiny
Committee rejected the caste claim of First Respondent
and cancelled the caste certificate issued to her in 1979
Consequently, the services of First Respondent were ter-
B minated by Appellant on the ground that her caste claim
had been invalidated. First Respondent did not challenge
the correctness of the order of the Scrutiny Committee,
and the same attained finality. She however challenged
the order of termination on the ground of inordinate de-
e lay of more than 10 years in making a reference to the
Scrutiny Committee for verification of the caste certificate.
While upholding the order of the Scrutiny Committee in"
validating the caste certificate, the High Court observed
that since the service of the First Respondent was termi-
D nated after a period of twenty two years on the basis that
she did not belong to the Scheduled Tribe and she hav-
ing herself given up the claim of belonging to the Sched-
uled Tribe, the interest of justice demanded that she be
continued in service. Accordingly, the High Court
quashed the order of termination and directed reinstate-
E ment of First Respondent with continuity in service but
without back-wages.
In appeal to this Court, the questions, which arose
for consideration were: (i) whether delay in making refer-
F ence to the Scrutiny Committee for ver~~i\:-.ation of the
caste certificate as also the delay on th~ part of the Scru-
tiny Committee in such verification per se vitiates the or-
der of termination of services of c,tn employee, even when
.. the certificate is ultimately found to be false and (ii)
G whether because of the employee having rendered ser-
vices to the employer for over twenty years, would it be
equitable to cancel her appointment, when admittedly in
the first instance the employee was not eligible for such
appointment. ·
H Allowing the appeal, the Court
REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA v. 321
... MADHULIKA GURUPRASAD DAHIR & ORS .
HELD:1.1. Except in a few decisions, where the ad- A
mission I appointment was not cancelled because of pe-
culiar factual matrix obtaining therein, the consensus of
judicial opinion is that equity, sympathy or generosity has
no place where the original appointment rests on a false
caste certificate. A person who enters the service by pro- B
·-' ducing a false caste certificate and obtains appointment
for the post meant for a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled
Tribe or· CBC, as the case may be, deprives a genuine
candidate falling in either of the said categories, of ap-
pointment to that post, does not deserve any sympathy c
or indulgence of this Court. He who comes to the Court
with a claim based on falsity and deception cannot plead
equity nor the Court would be justified to exercise equity
jurisdiction in his favour. [Para 13] [328-8,C,D,E]
1.2. An act of deliberate deception with a design to D
secure something, which is otherwise not due,
..-- ""' tantamounts to fraud. Fraud is a conduct either by letter
or words, which induces the other person or authority to
take a definite determinative stand as a response to the
conduct of the former either by words or letter. Fraud is E
anathema to all equitable principles and any affair tainted
with fraud cannot be perpetuated or saved by the applica-
tion of any equitable doctrine. [Paras 13, 14] [328-E,F,G, H]
1.3. In the present case, First Respondent having ac-
cepted the finding of the Scrutiny Committee, holding that F
the caste certificate furnished by her was false, the very
foundation of her appointment vanished and her appoint-
ment was rendered illegal. Her conduct renders her unfit
to be continued in service and must necessarily entail
\
termination of her service. Under these circumstances, G
there is absolutely no justification for her claim in respect
...; of the post merely on the ground that she had worked on
~4
the post for over twenty years. The post was meant for a
reserved candidate but she usurped the same by misrep-
resentation and deception. The fact that caste certificate H
322 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 11 S.C.R.
A was referred to the Scrutiny Committee for verification
after ten years of her joining the service and a long time
was taken by the Scrutiny Committee to verify the same
is of no consequence inasmuch as delay on both the
counts does not validate the caste certificate and the con-
s sequent illegal appointment. The selection of the em-
ployee was conceived in deceit and, therefore, could not
be saved by equitable considerations. [Paras 16, 17] [329-
D,E,F,G, 330-A,B]
1.4. The impugned judgment of the High Court quash-
C ing the order of termination of service of the employee and
0
directing her reinstatement cannot be sustained. The order
of termination based on the report of the Scrutiny Committee
does not suffer from any infirmity and the High Court should
not have interfered with the same. [Para 18] [330-8,C]
D
R. Vishwanatha Pillai Vs. State of Kera/a & Ors, (2004) 2
SC 105; Bank of India & Anr. vs. Avinash D. Mandivikar &
Ors, (2005) 7 SCC 690; Addi. General Manager, Human Re-
).... --
source, Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. vs. Suresh Ramkrishna
Burde, (2007) 5 SCC 336; Ram Preeti Yadav Vs. UP Board
E of High School and Intermediate Education & Ors., (2003) 8
SCC 311; Bhaurao Dagdu Para/kar Vs. State of Maharashtra
& Ors., (2005) 7 SCC 605; Ram Chandra Singh Vs. Savitri
Devi & Ors., (2003) 8 SCC 319 and Prakash Babula/sing
Parmar & Anr., (2007) 1 SCC 80 - relied on.
F Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. vs. Addi. Commissioner,
Tribal Development & Ors., (1994) 6 SCC 241; Manjula Sircar
& Ors. Vs. Harendra Bahadur Singh & Ors., AIR 2007 SC 3211
and Punjab National Bank & Anr. vs. Vilas, Sia Govindrao
Bokade & Anr., 2007 (8) SCALE 108 - referred to.
G
Derry Vs. Peek, (1889) 14 AC 337- referred to. I
/
Case Law Reference
(2007) 5 sec 336 relied on Para 8
H (2005) 7 sec 690 relied on Para 8
REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA v. 323
MADHULIKA GURUPRASAD DAHIR & ORS. [D.K. JAIN, J.]
AIR 2007 SC 3211 referred to Para 9 A
2007 (8) SCALE 108 referred to Para 9
(1994) s sec 241 referred to Para 12
(2004) 2 SC 105 relied on Para 13
__ .. B
(1889) 14 AC 337 referred to Para 13
(2003) 8 sec 311 relied on Para 13
(2005) 1 sec so5 relied on Para 13
(2003) 8 sec 319 relied on Para 14
c
(2001) 1 sec 80 relied on Para 15
CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4636
of 2008
From the final Judgment and Order dated 6.4.2005 of the D
.... -', High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in
Writ Petition No. 2558 of 2003
Dinesh Mathur, Sunil Murarka, Saurav Jain and
Rameshwar Prasad Goyal for the Appellant.
E
Ashok Srivastava, ·v.N. Raghupathy, Satyajit A. Desai,
Anagha S. Desai and Venkateswara Rao Anumolu for the Re-
spondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
F .
D.K. JAIN, J.: 1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred by
the Central Bank of India, a public sector undertaking, against
the judgment and order dated 6th April, 2005, passed by the
High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, in Writ G
~
Petition No.2558 of 2003. By the impugned judgment, the writ
petition filed by the first respondent, hereinafter referred to as
__,_. 4
'the employee', challenging the order of termination of her ser-
vices has been allowed with a direction to reinstate her with
continuity in service but without back-wages. H
-324 . : .SUPREME COURT REPORTS· - [2008] 11 S.C.R.
·A 3. The employeewas appointed to the post of Clerk in the
appellant-Ban~witJi effect from 18th March, 1981, against a post
reserved for "Scheduled Tribes", as she had Claimed to be be-
longing to "Thakur Scheduled Tribe", ·on the basis of a caste
certificate is~sued on 4th Decemb.er, 1979 .. In March,. 1991 , she
B was promqted as Junior Officer. It appears that pursuant to the
instructions issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Fi-
nance, Department of Economic Affairs on 23rd March, 1990,
directing all the public sector banks/financial institutions to get
the caste certificates of the existing employees, be.longing to
. c various scheduled tribes, verified, the' caste certificate filed by
the employee was referred to the CommitteeJor Scrutiny and
Verification of Tribe Claims, Nagpur (for short the Scrutiny Com-
. mittee), respondent No.2 herein.
4. The Scrutiny Committee granted an opportunity of hear-
. D ing to the employee on 11th October, 1999; made its own in-
quiries and found thatthe employee was not origina~ly belong-
ing to "Thakur Scheduled Tribe" but had obtained the Sched-
uled Tribe certificate from the issuing authority to take advan-
tage of various concessions given to the tribal· communities .
.E The Scrutiny Committee discovered that the employee had stud-
ied in Jeevan Shikshan Vidyalaya, Nagpur and by blotting out
the original caste "RajputDahayat" as mentioned in the school
leaving certificate, noted down the caste as "Thakur", and thus,
took admission in college on the basis of caste certificate
F "Thakur", which caste also got mentioned in the college leaving
certificate of the employee. In the absence of any documentary
evidence adduced by the employee to prove her claim, the Scru-
tiny Committee· relied on the affinity test and found that the em-
ployee qid not show any affinity towards "Thakur Scheduled
G Tribe". Accordingly, vide its order dated 2nd May, 2000, the Scru-
tiny Committee cancelled the caste certificate dated 4th De-
cember, 1979, issued to the employee. I
+-
5. The aforesaid order of the Scrutiny Committee was
challenged by the employee by way of a writ petition. The High
H Court allowed the writ petition on the ground that there was non
...
REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA v. 325
. MADHULIKA GURUPRASAD DAHIR & ORS. [D.K. JAIN, J.]
application of mind on the part of the Scrutiny Committee; set A
aside its order dated 2"d May, 2000 and remanded the matter
to the Scrutiny Committee for reconsideration of the caste claim
of the employee.
6. Pursuant thereto, the Scrutiny Cbmmittee, reconsidered
the caste claim of the employee. Concurring with its earlier find- B
·-4.
ings, vide order dated 29th May, 2003, the Committee again
rejected the claim of the employee and cancelled the caste
certificate dated 4th December, 1979. Consequently, by order
dated 28th June, 2003, the services of the employee were ter-
minated by the appellant on the ground that her tribe claim had c
been invalidated. Aggrieved, the employee preferred a writ
petition challenging both the said orders.
7. It is pertinent, however, to note that at the hearing of the
writ petition before the High Court, the employee did not chal-
D
lenge the correctness of the order of the Scrutiny Committee,
~ dated 29th May, 2003 and the same attained finality, which mani-
festly shows that the employee accepted the finding of the Scru-
tiny Committee that she did not belong to ''Thakur Scheduled
Tribe", as recorded on the caste certificate filed for obtaining
employment. The order of termination of service was challenged E
only on the ground of inordinately delay of more than 1Oyears
in making a reference to the Scrutiny Committee for verifica-
tion of the caste certificate. Accepting the said plea of the em-
ployee, while upholding the order of the Scrutiny Committee
dated 29th May, 2003, invalidating the caste certificate, the High F
~ Court has quashed the order of termination dated 28th June,
2003. The High Court has observed that since the services of
the employee have been terminated after a period of twenty
two years on the basis that she does not belong to the Sched-
uled Tribe and the employee having herself given up the claim G
of belonging to the Scheduled Tribe, the interest of justice de-
mands that the employee be continued in service. Aggrieved
. . -+
thereby, the appellant has come up before us in this appeal.
8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant
H
326 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 11 S.C.R.
A submitted that having found that the findings of the Scrutiny
Committee were correct, the High Court should not have
quashed the order of termination of service, as admittedly the
employee had obtained appointment by fraudulent means by
producing a false caste certificate. It was asserted that neither
B the delay in reference to the Scrutiny Committee nor the time
taken by the Committee in scrutinizing the certificate can be
used as a ground to validate a fraudulent action. It was also
urged that having entered the service by deceitful means, ren-
dering of long period of services does not entitle the appellant
c to any relief in equity. In support of the proposition, reliance was
placed on the decisions of this Court in Addi. General Man-
ager-Human Resource, Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs.
Suresh Ramkrishna Burde 1 and Bank of India & Anr. Vs.
A vinash 0. Mandivikar & Ors. 2 .
D 9. Per contra, learned senior counsel appearing on be-
half of the employee, while supporting the decision of the High
Court, submitted that in the absence of any finding by the Scru-
tiny Committee that the caste certificate had been obtained
fraudulently, the High Court was justified in directing her rein-
E statement. Learned counsel contended that it has not been
evolved as a general principle that in every case where the caste
claim is rejected, the equitable jurisdiction of the Court is ousted.
In support of the submission that the parameters for consider-
ation of claim for employment are different in a case of fraud as
F compared to a mere rejection of such a claim, learned counsel
referred us to the decisions of this Court in Suresh Ramkrishna
Burde (supra), Manjula Sircar & Ors. Vs. Harendra Bahadur
Singh & Ors. 3 and Punjab National Bank & Anr. Vs. Vilas, SI
0 Govindrao Bokade & Anr. 4 .
G 10. The sequence and the narration of facts above leaves
little doubt in our mind that the caste certificate, on the basis
whereof the employee got employment, was false to her knowl-
edge. Based on that the Scrutiny Committee, on reconsidera-
tion after remand by the High Court, vide order dated 291h May,
H 2003, again invalidated employee's caste certificate, resulting
REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA v. 327
MADHULIKA GURUPRASAD DAHIR & ORS. [D.K. JAIN, J.]
• in termination of the services by order dated 28th June, 2003
(supra). As noted above, the said order of the Scrutiny Com-
A
mittee having not been challenged, has attained finality and re-
mains in operation. It is, thus, not a case of mere rejection of a
claim and the cited authorities are inapplicable.
... 11. In the above background, the questions for our con-
sideration would be: (i) whether delay in making reference to
B
the Scrutiny Committee for verification of the caste certificate
as also the delay on the part of the Scrutiny Committee in such
verification per se vitiates the order of termination of services
...... of an employee, even when the certificate is ultimately found to c
be false and (ii) whether because of the employee having ren-
dered services to the employer for over twenty years, would it
be equitable to cancel her appointment, when admittedly in the
first instance the employee was not eligible for such appoint-
ment? D
. 1 12. Both the issues are no longer res integra. The impli-
cations of misuse of the benefits conferred by the Constitution
on a particular section or sections of the citizenry were high-
lighted by this Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. Vs. Addi.
Commissioner, Tribal Development & Ors. 5 . It was said that E
the admission wrongly gained or appointment wrongly obtained
on the basis of false social status certificate necessarily has
the effect of depriving the genuine Scheduled Castes or Sched-
uled Tribes or OBC candidates as enjoined in the Constitution
of the benefits conferred on them by the Constitution. The genu- F
~ ine candidates are also denied admission to educational insti-
tutions or appointments to office or posts under a State for want
of social status certificate. Therefore, with a view to streamline
the procedure for the issuance of social status certificates, their
scrutiny and their approval, the Court issued as many as fifteen G
directions. One of the directions so issued, was that as soon
__. as the finding is recorded by the Scrutiny Committee, holding
that the certificate obtained was false, on its cancellation and
confiscation simultaneously, it should be communicated to the
educational institution concerned, or the appointing authority H
328 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 11 S.C.R.
A with a request to cancel the admission or the. appointment.
Thereupon, the admission or the appointment shall be cancelled
without any further notice to the candidate and the candidate
shall be debarred from further study or continue in office in a
post.
B .13. Similarly, the plea regarding rendering of services for
a long period has been considered and rejected in a series of
decisions of this Court and we deem it unnecessary to launch
on exhaustive dissertation on principles in this context. It would
suffice to state that except in a few decisions, where the ad mis-
c sion/appointment was not cancelled because of peculiar fac-
tual. matrix obtaining therein, the consensus of judicial opinion
is that equity, sympathy or generosity has no place where the
original appointment rests on a false caste certificate. A per-
son who enters the service by producing a false caste certifi-
D · cate and obtains appointment for the post meant for a Sched-
uled Cast~ or Scheduled Tribe or OBC, as the case may be, , F.
deprives a genuine candidate falling in either of the said cat-
egories, o'f appointment to that post, does not deserve any sym-
pathy or· i,r'idulgence of this Court. He who comes to the Court
E: with a claim based on falsity and deception cannot plead eq-
uity nor· the Court would be justified to exercise equity jurisdic-
tion in his favour. An act of deliberate deception with a design
to sepure something, which is otherwise not due, tantamounts
to fraud. Fraud is a conduct either by letter or words, which in-
F; duc~s.'the other person or authority to take a definite determi-
nati.ve stand as a response to the conduct of the former either
by words or letter. [See: R. Vishwanatha Pillai Vs. State of
Kera/a & Ors. 6 .. Bank of India (supra), Addi. General Manager
(supra), Derry Vs. Peek7 , Ram Preeti Yadav Vs. UP Board
of High School and Intermediate Education & Ors. 8 and
G Bhc:/ilrao· Dagdu Paralkar Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 9 ]
· 14. In Ram Chandra Singh Vs. Savitri Devi & Ors. 10 , this
Court had ·observed that fraud is anathema to all equitable prin-
ciples and any affair tainted with fraud cannot be perpetuated
H or saved by the application of any equitable doctrine.
REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA v. 329
MADHULIKA GURUPRASAD DAHIR & ORS. [D.K. JAIN, J.]
15. Recently, in State of Maharashtra & Ors. Vs. Ravi A.
Prakash Babula/sing Parmar & Anr. 11 , dealing with a similar
situation, this Court has observed thus:
''The makers of the Constitution laid emphasis on equality
amongst citizens. The Constitution of India provides for
protective discrimination and reservation so as to enable B
the disadvantaged group to come on the same platform
as that of the forward community. If and when a person
takes an undue advantage of the said beneficent provision
of the Constitution by obtaining the benefits of reservation
and other benefits provided under the Presidential Order C
although he is not entitled thereto, he not only plays a fraud
on the society but in effect and substance plays a fraud on
the Constitution. When, therefore, a certificate is granted
to a person who is not otherwise entitled thereto, itJ~.
entirely incorrect to contend that the State shall ~e. helples~ D
spectator in the matter."
16. Having considered the matter in the light of the afore-
stated legal position, in our judgment, the decision of the High
Court is untenable. As noted supra, the employee having ac-
cepted the finding of the Scrutiny Committee, holding that the E
caste certificate furnished by the employee was false, the very
foundation of her appointment vanished and her appointment
was rendered illegal. Her conduct renders her unfit to be con-
tinued in service and must necessarily entail termination of her
service. Under these circumstances, there is absolutely no jus- F
tification for her claim in respect of the post merely on the
ground that she had worked on the post for over twenty years.
The post was meant for a reserved candidate but she usurped
the same by misrepresentation and deception. In our opinion,
the fact that caste certificate was referred to the Scrutiny Com- G
mittee for verification after ten years of her joi!)ing the service
and a long time was taken by the Scrutiny Committee to verify
the same is of no consequence inasmuch as delay on both the
counts does not validate the caste certificate and the conse-
quent illegal appointment. H
330 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 11 S.C.R.
A 17. We are also unable to persuade ourselves to agree
....
with learned counsel for the employee that in the absence of
any finding of fraud having been played by the employee, the
order of the High Court is equitable and should not be inter-
fered with. As noted above, the selection of the employee was
B ·conceived in deceit and, therefore, could not be saved by equi-
table considerations.
· 18. In view of the aforegoing discussion, the impugned
j.udgment and order quashing the order of termination of ser-
vice of the employee and directing her reinstatement cannot be
C sustained. The order of termination based on the report of the
Scrutiny Committee does not suffer from any infirmity and the
High Court should not have interfered with the same.
19. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the judgment and
order of the High Court dated. 61h April, 2005 is set aside but
0
with no order as to costs.
B.B.B. Appeal allowed.
~··
t-
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "service law"Sign in to search