Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2000 DIGILAW 2176 (SC)

State of Maharashtra v. Om Raj

2000-12-12

S.N.VARIAVA, S.RAJENDRA BABU

body2000
ORDER : C.A. No. 3102 of 1988 1. The challenge in this appeal is covered by a decision of this Court in State of Maharashtra vs. Milind, (2001) 1 SCC 4 . 2. In view of the aforesaid decision, the respondent, Om Raj cannot claim to belong to the Scheduled Tribe. However, if he has been admitted to any professional college pursuant to the orders made by the High Court, the same shall stand protected in the terms stated by this Court in the order stated above. This appeal is disposed of accordingly. 3. However, it is made clear that if he is deriving any benefit pursuant to the order made by the High Court the same shall continue to be available to him to the advantage of being a Scheduled Tribe but no further. C.A. No. 7375 of 2000 [Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 6524 of 1988] 4. Leave granted. 5. The appellant having belonged to Koshti caste claimed to be included in the Scheduled Tribe of Halba and obtained an appointment as Assistant Engineer. When his appointment was sought to be terminated on the basis that he did not belong to Scheduled Tribe by the Government a writ petition was filed before the High Court challenging that order which was allowed. That order is questioned in this appeal. The questions arising in this case are covered by the decision in State of Maharashtra vs. Milind and were got to be allowed, however, the benefits derived till now shall be available to the appellant to the effect that his appointment as Assistant Engineer shall stand protected but no further. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. C.A. No. 2295 of 1986 6. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 3102 of 1988. C.A. No. 3200 of 1988 7. Appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 7375 of 2000 [Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 6524 of 1988]. C.A. No. 6235 of 1990 8. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 3102 of 1988. C.A. No. 2296 of 1986 9. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 3102 of 1988. C.A. No. 2661 of 1989 10. C.A. No. 6235 of 1990 8. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 3102 of 1988. C.A. No. 2296 of 1986 9. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 3102 of 1988. C.A. No. 2661 of 1989 10. The High Court in this appeal noticed that the Scrutiny Committee had relied upon the extracts of the birth certificate describing the caste of the respondent to be Koshti and not Halba but no opportunity was afforded to the respondent to establish his case that he belongs to Halba. Having said so, the High Court proceeded to consider whether the respondent belongs to Halba tribe or not and decided the matter. That course should not have been adopted by the High Court. Hence the order made by the High Court is set aside and the matter shall stand remitted to the Scrutiny Committee for fresh consideration after notice to all the parties. The appeal is allowed accordingly. W.P. (C) No. 8 of 1986 11. The questions raised in this writ petition are identical to those considered by this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Milindand following the said decision and for the reasons stated therein, the writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as stated in State of Maharashtra vs. Milind. C.A. No. 2298 of 1986 12. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in W.P. (C) No. 8 of 1986. C.A. No. 2297 of 1986 13. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 3102 of 1988. C.A. No. 79 of 1995 14. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 3102 of 1988. S.L.P. (C) No. 5228 of 1991 15. In view of the decision in State of Maharashtra vs. Milind this petition is dismissed. S.L.P. (C) No. 4470 of 1986 16. In view of the order passed in C.A. No. 7375 of 2000 [Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 6524 of 1988] this petition is dismissed. C.A. No. 3199 of 1988 17. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 3102 of 1988. S.L.P. (C) No. 23061 of 1996 18. In view of the decision in State of Maharashtra vs. Milind this petition is dismissed. C.A. No. 3199 of 1988 17. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in C.A. No. 3102 of 1988. S.L.P. (C) No. 23061 of 1996 18. In view of the decision in State of Maharashtra vs. Milind this petition is dismissed. S.L.P. (C) No. 4539 of 1997 19. In view of the decision in State of Maharashtra vs. Milind this petition is dismissed. C.A. Nos. 3519-3520 of 2000 20. In these two matters the Scrutiny Committee found that the appellant does not belong to Scheduled Tribe, being Koshti and, therefore, his admission was sought to be invalidated. At that stage the appellant approached the High Court. The High Court dismissed the said writ petition. Hence this appeal. 21. The question raised in these appeals is covered by a decision of this Court in State of Maharashtra vs. Milind and deserves to be dismissed. Inasmuch as the appellant has been admitted into an engineering college and has been continuing studies thereto, pursuant to the interlocutory order granted by this Court, it is not proper to disturb the studies he has already commenced. Therefore, he is also entitled to the benefit of the observations made by this Court in the abovesaid case to the extend of continuing his service but he shall not claim the benefit of the same in future. 22. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.