REGISTRAR GENERAL, CALCUTTA HIGH COURTversusSHRINIVAS PRASAD SHAH AND OTHERS,

                    [2013] 3 S.C.R. 211


    REGISTRAR GENERAL, CALCUTTA HIGH COURT                        A
                              v.
        SHRINIVAS PRASAD SHAH AND OTHERS
             (Civil Appeal No. 4282 of 2013)
                        MAY 3, 2013
                                                                  B
   [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.]

   WEST BENGAL SCHEDULED CASTES AND
SCHEDULED TRIBES (IDENTIFICATION) ACT, 1994:
                                                                  C·
    s.5 - Issuance of certificate - Competent authority -
West Bengal Judicial Service Examination, 2007-·
Respondent claiming to be a member of Scheduled Tribe on
the basis of certificate issued by Director, Backward Class
Welfare, West Bengal - Treated as a general category
candidate - Held: The notification specifically stipulates that   D
a candidate belonging to SC/ST/BC must have a certificate
in support of his/her claim from a competent authority as
specified under the Act - There is no effor in the decision
taken by the Commission in not entertaining respondent's
application as a ST candidate since no certificate was            E
produced from competent authority - However, respondent
would be appointed as a Judicial Officer consequent to the
examination conducted in 2010 wherein he appeared by
producing the certificate issued by competent authority.
                                                                  F
    The respondent In terms of Notification dated
17.1.2007, submitted his application for West Bengal
Judicial Service Examination 2007 by paying an amount
of Rs.2001· as required by General category candidates.
However In the application he mentioned that he                   G
belonged to "Gonda Community", a Scheduled Tribe and
also attached a certificate from the Director, Backward
Class Welfare, West Bengal. The Commission considered
him as a general candidate as he had not produced the
                             211                                  H
    212       SUPREME COURT REPORTS           [2013] 3 S.C.R.

A certificate from the competent authority. The writ petition
  filed by him was allowed by the Single Judge of the High
  Court. The Division Bench declined to interfere.

          Allowing the appeal, the Court

B      HELD: 1.1. This Court is of the considered opinion
  that in view of the specific legislation passed by the West
  Bengal State Legislature Assembly i.e. West Bengal
  Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Identification)
  Act, 1994, and the specific stipulation in the notification
C issued to the candidates, the guideline 10 of para 13 of
  Kumari Madhuri Patil's case is inapplicable, particularly to
  the facts of the instant case. The Act does not recognize
  the Director, Backward Class Welfare, West Bengal as a
  competent authority to issue the certificate. Therefore,
o the Commission was justified in not placing reliance on
  the certificate issued by the Director, Backward Class
  Welfare, West Bengal. [para 13] [220-G-H; 221-A]

     Kumari Madhuri Patil and Another vs. Additional
  Commissioner, Tribal Development and Others, 1994 (3)
E Suppl. SCR 50 = (1994) 6 SCC 241 - held inapplicable.

       1.2. In the instant case, the Court is not concerned
  with dispute that is pending before the Scrutiny
  Committee. This is a case of total non-compliance of the
F conditions stipulated in the notification dated
  17.1.2007(information to the candidates) wherein it has
  been specifically stated that a candidate ·claiming to be
  SC/ST/BC must have a certificate in support of his/her
  claim from a competent authority specified in the West
G Bengal Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes
  (Identification) Act, 1994. There is no error in the decision
  taken by the Commission in not entertaining the
  respondent's application as a ST candidate since no
  certificate was produced from the competent authority,
H as provided under the Act. Consequently, in the absence
  REGISTRAR GENERAL, CALCUTIA HIGH COURT v.             213
            SHRINIVAS PRASAD SHAH
of the requisite certificate, the Commission was justified     A
in treating him as a general category candidate. [para 12
and 15) [220-B-D; 222-B-C]

     1.3: The guidelines in in Kumari Madhuri Patil's case
or the brochure issued by the Government of India,             8
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions,
Department of Personnel and Training, New Delhi would
not override the specific conditions stipulated in the
notification (information to the candidates) of compliance
of the provisions of the West BengalAct of 1994. [para 16)     C
[222-D-E]

    1.4. Further, clause 13.,2 of Chapter 13 of the brochure
issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel,
Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of
Personnel and Training, New Delhi is also inapplicable in      D
view of the statutory provision incorporated in the West
Bengal Act of 1994. [para 13) [221-B]
     1.5. The Judgment of the High Court is set aside.
However, the respondent would be appointed as a                E
judicial officer in the West Bengal Judicial Service
consequent to the examination conducted in the year
2010 since he produced the Certificate issued by the
competent authority under West Bengal Act of 1994 on
22.9.2009. [para 17) [222-F-H]
                                                               F
    GM, Indian Bank vs. R. Rani and Anr. (2007) 12 SCC
796 - cited.
                    Case Law Reference:
    1994 (3) Suppl. SCR 50        held inapplicable para 4     G
    (2001) 12 sec 796             cited           para 7
    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
4282 of 2013.
                                                               H
    214       SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2013] 3 S.C.R.

A       From the Judgment & Order dated 16.09.2011 of the High
    Court at Calcutta in FMA No, 1217 of 2010.
      Jaideep Gupta, Raju Chatterjee, Sankar Divate, G.S.
  Chatterjee, Soumya Chakraborty, A. Deb Kumar, Atulesh
  Kumar, Y. Lokesh, Avijit Bhattacharjee, Bikas Kargupta for the
8
  appearing parties.
       . The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
          K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J 1. Leave granted.
c     2. The :question raised in this case is whether the Public
  Service Commission of West Bengal (for short 'the
  Commission'} was justified in considering the application of
  respondent No.1 as a general candidate for recruitment to the
  West Bengal Judicial Service Examination, 2007 rather than
0 a member of the Scheduled Tribe Community.

       3. The Commission circulated a notification on 17th
   January, 2007 for the information to the candidates on 17th
   February, 2007 of its conducting West Bengal Judicial Service
E Examination 2007. In response to the said information the
   respondent submitted his application by paying an amount of
   Rs.200/-, as required by the candidates in the general category
   in order to appear for the examination of 2007. In the
  application form he had mentioned that he belonged to 'Gonda
F Comm1.1nity' - Scheduled Tribe Community and also attached
  a certificate from the Director, Backward Class Welfare, West
  Bengal. The Commission considered the application of the
  respondent as a general candidate since he had not produced
  the certificate required to be produced from the competent
G authority. The respondent then attended preliminary
  examination and final examination as a general candidate. The
  result of the West Bengal Judicial Service Examination 2007
  was published in the newspapers on 29.9.2007 and the
  respondent was shown as a general category candidate. Later·
H the respondent appeared for the personality test as a general
  REGISTRAR GENERAL, CALCUTIA HIGH COURT v. 215
 SHRINIVAS PRASAD SHAH [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
category candidate on 4.12.2007. The Commission published       A
the list of 152 selected candidates on 20.3.2008 and the
respondent's name was rank No.86 among the general
category candidates, he could not get appointment.
      4. The respondent then preferred a representation on B
24.4.2008 to the Chairman of the Commission and to the
various authorities to consider him as a member of the
Scheduled Tribe Community and be selected in that category
for the examination held in 2007. Since there was no response,
he filed Writ Petition No.9756 (W) of 2008 before the High C
Court of Calcutta contending that since his status as a
Scheduled Tribe was not in question, he should not have been
considered as a general category candidate especially in view
of the certificate produced by him from the Director, West
Bengal Backward Class Welfare. Learned Single Judge of the
Calcutta High Court noticed that he had produced a certificate D
issued by the Director, Backward Class Welfare, West Bengal
on 08.01.2003 along with the application and hence he should
have been con·sidered as a member of the Scheduled Tribe
Community, going by the principle laid down by this court in
Kumari Madhuri Patil and Another v.                Additional E
Commissioner, Tribal Development and Others (1994) 6 SCC
241. Learned Single Judge therefore directed the Commission
and the High Court to appoint the respondent in West Bengal
Judicial Service pursuant to the examination conducted in the
year 2007 treating him as a member of the Scheduled Tribe F
Community.
     5. The Registrar General, aggrieved by the judgment of
the learned Single Judge filed FMA No.1217 of 2010 before
the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court. The Division G
Bench also concurred with the view of the learned Single Judge
and dismissed the appeal. Against which the present appeal
has been filed by the Registrar General, Calcutta High Court.
      6. Shri Jaideep Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing
for the appellant submitted that the High Court has committed   H
    216      SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2013] 3 S.C.R.

A an error in over-looking the specific conditions prescribed in
   the information to the candidates for the West Bengal Judicial
   Service Examination 2007. Learned senior counsel submitted
   that the information specifically stipulated that the caste
   certificate should be produced from a competent authority as
B specified in the West Bengal Judicial Service and STs
   (Identification) Act, 1994 and SCs/STs Welfare Department
   Order No.261-TW/EC/MR-103/94 dated 6th April, 1995. Further
   it is also pointed out that no claim from a member of SC/ST/
   BC or physically handicap would be entertained after
c ·submission of the application. Learned senior counsel also
   submitted that the Judgment of this Court in Kumari Madhuri
   Patil's case (supra) has been misinterpreted and mis-applied
   and nothing could be spelt out from that Judgment or
   subsequent judgments diluting the conditions stipulated by the
   Commission for the examination held in the year 2007.
0
   Learned senior counsel also submitted, though in the
   application form the respondent had indicated that he belonged
   to ST Community but he did not produce the required certificate
   as provided in the above-mentioned Act and that he had
   deposited Rs.200/-which was meant only for the general
E category candidates. The respondent sat for the said
   examination as a general category candidate and could not get
   appointment and having failed to get selected he is estopped
   from contending that he should have been treated as a member
   of the Scheduled Tribe for the 2007 examination. Learned
F senior counsel, however, submitted that later he has produced
   the required certificate in the 2010 Examination and he is being
   considered for appointment as a judicial officer in the West
   Bengal Judicial Service treating him as a member of the
   Scheduled Tribe.
G
       7. Mr.Soumya Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for
  the respondent submitted that the High Court has correctly
  applied the guidelines laid down by this Court in Kumari
  Madhud Patil's case (supra) and also submitted that the
H principles laid down in that are binding judicial precedents.
  REGISTRAR GENERAL, .CALCUTTA HIGH COURT v.    217
 SHRINIVAS PRASAD SHAH [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
Reference was made to the Judgment of this Court in GM,              A
Indian Bank v. R. Rani and Another (2007) 12 S~C 796.
Learned counsel also referred to the brochure published by the
Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances
arid Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training, New
Delhi wherein it has been stated that where a candidate              B
belonging to SC/ST is unable to produce a certificate from any
of the prescribed authority he might be appointed provisionally,
on the basis of a prime facie proof, subject to his furnishing the
prescribed certificate within a reasonable time. Learned
counsel submitted applying the principle laid down by this Court     c
in Kumari Madhuri Pati/'s case (supra) and the brochure
mentioned above, learned Single Judge, as well as the Division
Bench of the High Court, was right in holding that the
respondent be treated as a member of Scheduled Tribe for the
2007 Examination and be appointed accordingly.                       D

      8. We may first refer to the notification issued by the
Commission (information to the candidates) for the West
Bengal Judicial Service Examination 2007. Earlier part of the
notification reads as follows:
                                                                     E
    "The relevant rules and necessary particulars are stated
    in the following paragraphs. A candidate should verify from
    the notified rules that he/she is eligible for admission to
    the examination. The condition prescribed cannot be
    relaxed"                                                         F

      9. The notification also refers to the particulars and
certificates required, which reads as under:

    "PARTICULARS AND CERTIFICATES REQUIRED:
                                                                     G
      (i)   A candidate claiming to be SC/ST/BC must have
            a certificate in support of his/her claim from a
            competent authority ·of West Bengal as specified
            below [vide the West Bengal SCs .and STs
            (Identification) Act, 1994 and SCs, STs Welfare          H
    218            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                (2013] 3 S.C.R.

A                   Department Order No.261-1W/EC/MR-103/94
                    dated 06.04.1995]
           (ii)     In the District, the Sub-Divisional Officer of the Sub-
                    Divisional concerned;
B          (iii)    In Kolkata, the District Magistrate South 24-
                    Parganas or such Additional District Magistrates,
                    South 24-Parganas as may be authorized by the
                    District Magistrate, South 24-Parganas in this
                    behalf."
c
           Further, the notification also states as follows:
          "No claim for being a member of the SC/ST and BC or a
          Physically Handicapped person will be entertained after
          submission of the application."
D
        1O.We are in this case concerned with the question
   whether the Judgment in Kumari Madhuri Patil's case (supra),
   especially sub-paragraph 10 of Paragraph 13 or clause 13.2
   of the Chapter 13 of the brochure would override the specific
E provision stipulated in the notification (information to the
   candidates). The notification specifically stipulates that a
   candidate belonging to SC/ST/BC must have a certificate in
   support of his/her claim from a competent authority as specified
   under the West Bengal Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes
F (Identification) Act, 1994. That Act was enacted by West
   Bengal Legislature to provide for identification of SCs and STs
   in West Bengal and for matters connected therewith or
   incidental thereto. Section 4 of the Act deals with the
  ·identification of members of Schedule Tribe which reads as
G under:
          "4. Any person belonging to any of the tribes or tribal
          communities or parts of ·or groups within tribes or tribal
          communities, specified in Part XII of the Schedule to the
          Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, and resident in the
H         locality specified in relation to him in that Part of such
  REGISTRAR GENERAL, CALCUTTA HIGH COURT v.                     219
 SHRINIVAS PRASAD SHAH [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]

     Schedule, may be identified, by a certificate, to be a             A
     member of the Schedule Tribe."

    Section 5 of the Act deals with the issuance of a certificate
which reads as under:

      "5.     A certificate under section 3 or section 4 may be         B
             issued-

      (a)    In the district, by the Sub-divisional Officer of the
             sub-division concerned, and

      (b)     In Calcutta, by the District Magistrate, South 24-
                                                                        c
             Parganas, or by such Additional District Magistrate,
             South 24-Parganas, as may be authorized by the
             District Magistrate, South 24-Parganas, in this
             behalf."
                                                                        D
             Explanation I. "Calcutta" shall mean the town of
             Calcutta as defined in section 3 of the Calcutta
             Police Act, 1866.

             Explanation II - For the removal of doubt, it is           E
             hereby declared that for the purposes of this Act,
             the District Magistrate, South 24-Parganas, or the
             Additional District Magistrate, South 24-Parganas,
             authorized by the District Magistrate, South 24-
             Parganas, under clause (b) of this section, shall
                                                                        F
             have jurisdiction over Calcutta.

    Section 6 of the Act deals with the procedure of issuance
of certificate under the Act, on application by the person
requiring a certificate under that Act in such form and manner
and upon production of such evidence, as may be prescribed.             G

     11. Power has been conferred on the prescribed authority
under Section 7 to reject the application if it is not satisfied with
the evidence produced by any person under Section 6 and the
Rules made thereunder for the issuance of a certificate under           H
    220       SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2013] 3 S.C.R.


A Section 5, giving a person an opportunity of being heard.
  Section 8 provides for an appeal against any refusal to issue
  a certificate.

          12. We find no error in the decision taken by the
B Commission in not entertaining the respondent's application as
  a ST candidate since no certificate was produced from the
  competent authority, as provided under the West Bengal
  Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes {Identification) Act,
  1994. The information to the candidates specifically stated that
  the candidates claiming to be SC/ST/BC must have a certificate
C from a competent authority specified in the West Bengal
  Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes {Identification) Act,
  1994. No such certificate was produced from that competent
  authority by the respondent. Consequently, in the absence of
  the requisite certificate, the Commission was justified in treating
D him as a general category candidate. The first time the
  respondent produced the certificate from the competent
  authority was only when he appeared in the examination held
  on 30. 7.2010, by that time he had obtained a certificate from
  the competent authority on 22.9.2009. Admittedly, at the time
E when 2007 examination was held no such certificate was
  produced from the competent authority along with the
  application. Consequently, the respondent was treated as a
  general category candidate and hence he could not get
  appointment as judicial officer in the examination held in the
F year 2007.
          13. We are of the considered opinion that in view of the
  specific legislation passed by the West Bengal State
  Legislature Assembly i.e. West Bengal Scheduled Caste and
  Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Act, 1994, and the specific
G stipulation in the notification issued to the candidates, the
  guideline 10 of para 13 of Kumari Madhuri Patil's case (supra)
  is inapplicable, particularly to the facts of this case. Act does
  not recognize the Director, Backward Class Welfare, West
  Bengal as a competent authority to issue the certificate.
H
  REGISTRAR GENERAL, CALCUTIA HIGH COURT v. 221
 SHRINIVAS PRASAD SHAH [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]

Therefore, the Commission was justified in not placing reliance      A
on the certificate issued by the Director, Backward Class
Welfare, West Bengal. Further clause 13.2 of Chapter 13 of
the brochure issued by the Government of India, Ministry of
Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of
Personnel and Training, New Delhi is also in applicable in view      B
of the statutory provision incorporated in the West Bengal
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Act,
1994. In this connection we may refer sub-para 10 of para 13
of Kumari Madhuri Patil's case (supra) which reads as under:
     ""In case of any delay in finalizing the proceedings, and in    C
     the meanwhile the last date for admission into an
     educational institution or appointment to an officer post, is
     getting expired, the candidate be admitted by the Principal
     or such other authority competent in that behalf or
     appointed on the basis of the social status certificate         D
     already issued or an affidavit duly sworn by the parent/
     guardian/candidate before the competent officer or non-
     official and such .admission or appointment should be only
     provisional, subject to the result of the inquiry by the
     Scrutiny Committee."                                            E
      14. Kumari Madhuri Patil's case (supra) speaks of the
constitution of a Scrutiny Committee to resolve the dispute on
caste status. When there is a dispute with regard to the
certificate produced, there is bound to be delay in finalization
of the proceedings, it is in that context sub-para 10 of para 13     F
of Kumari Madhuri Patil's case (supra) stated that in case of
any delay in finalizing the proceedings by the Scrutiny
Committee and in the meanwhile last date for admission into
an educational institutions or appointment to an officer post is
getting expired, the candidate be admitted by the principal or       G
such other authority competent in that behalf or appointed on
the basis of social status certificate already issued or an
affidavit duly sworn by the parent/guardian/candidate before
the competent officer or non-official and such admission or
appointment should be only provisional, subject to the result of     H
    222      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2013] 3 S.C.R.

A the enquiry by the Scrutiny Committee. In GM, Indian Bank
  (supra) this Court held that the directions issued by the
  Judgment in Kumari Madhuri Patil's case (supra) would have
  a binding force of law.
        15. We are in this case not concerned with any dispute
B that is pending before the Scrutiny Committee, this is a case
  of total non-compliance of the conditions stipulated in the
  notification (information to the candidates) wherein it has been
  specifically stated that a candidate claiming to be SC/ST/BC
  must have a certificate in support of his/her claim from a
C competent authority specified in the West Bengal Scheduled
  Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Act, 1994.
        16. In our view, the guidelines in in Kumari Madhuri Pati/'s
  case (supra) or the brochure issued by the Government of India,
D Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions,
  Department of Personnel and Training, New Delhi would not
  override the specific conditions stipulated in the notification
  (information to the candidates) of compliance of the provisions
  of the West Bengal Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes
  (Identification) Act, 1994. In such circumstances we find no
E error in the decision taken by the Commission in not
  entertaining the application of the respondent as a member of
  the ST Community due to non-production of the certificate from
  the competent authority specified in the above-mentioned Act.
F       17. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the Judgment
  of the High Court is set aside. However, we are inclined to
  record the submission of the learned senior counsel, appearing
  for the appellant that the respondent would be appointed as a
  judicial officer in the West Bengal Judicial Service consequent
G to the examination conducted in the year 2010 since he has
  produced the Certificate issued by the competent authority
  under The West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
  Tribes (Identification) Act, 1994. Appeal is, therefore, allowed
  as above, however there will be no order as to costs.

H R.P.                                            Appeal allowed.