JUDGEMENT AND ORDER : By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the Order No. F.VII-35/95/GS/AMC/136082, dated 03.01.2017 (Annexure 11 to the writ petition) whereby the Municipal Commissioner has discontinued the engagement of the petitioner as Sanitary Inspector w.e.f. 01.01.2017 in terms of the judgment and order dated 14.08.2015 delivered in WP(C) 339 of 2009. The petitioner has also been asked to handover the complete charge to Sri Parag Debbarma, Sanitary Inspector of East Zone, the respondent No.3. 2. The case as projected in the writ petition shortly is that the petitioner had on completed his graduation and post-graduation from Calcutta University in the year 1983 and 1989 respectively. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had passed the Sanitary Inspector Diploma Examination as conducted by All India Institute of Local Self Government, Bombay in the year 1985 and as such according to the petitioner he was eligible for the post of Sanitary Inspector under the respondents No. 1 and 2. Though the petitioner’s name was registered with the Employment Exchange, the respondents No. 1 and 2 did appoint one Sri Jayanta Choudhury who was not even qualified for the post. The petitioner had challenged the said appointment order by filing the writ petition in the Gauhati High Court, which at that time had the jurisdiction over the subject matter within the territory of this State, being Civil Rule no. 153 of 1993. The said writ petition was allowed by the judgment dated 03.08.1994 whereby the appointment of Jayanta Choudhury was quashed and the respondent authorities were directed to consider the eligible candidates. The said judgment and order dated 03.08.1994 was affirmed in the writ appeal that was filed against the said judgment being Writ Appeal No. 349 of 1994. 3. The petitioner on 23.12.1994 had applied for the post for Sanitary Inspector. Thereafter he had filed another application on 10.02.1995. Finally he got a call letter to appear in the interview on 10.03.1995. By the order under No. 2544-49/VII-32/94, dated 04.05.1995, the petitioner was appointed as Sanitary Inspector on adhoc basis for a period of 6(six) months in the scale of pay of Rs.1300-3220 with other admissible allowances. The petitioner had joined the said post on 05.05.1995. There is no dispute that the petitioner continued the said post till 31.12.2016 by the extensions granted by the Agartala Municipal Corporation. The petitioner had joined the said post on 05.05.1995. There is no dispute that the petitioner continued the said post till 31.12.2016 by the extensions granted by the Agartala Municipal Corporation. The petitioner has received all service benefits including the yearly increments and benefits under the Career Advance Scheme and ACP. The petitioner was asked by a show-cause dated 13.06.2016 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Agartala to explain why his caste certificate dated 06.05.1995 whereby the petitioner was recognized as the member of Schedule Caste shall not be cancelled. On the purported inquiry, the said certificate was cancelled by the order dated 01.06.1998. The petitioner had challenged the said order of cancellation of his Scheduled Caste certificate by filing the writ petition being Civil Rule No. 195 of 1998 in the Gauhati High Court, Agartala Bench. By the common judgment dated 09.01.2006 along with other writ petitions the said order was inferred and the verification was remanded to the State Level Scrutiny Committee (SLSC) to be conducted as per the procedure laid down by the Apex Court. The SLSC on conducting a fresh inquiry issued a notice dated 26.03.2006, but the petitioner did not reply to the said notice and also did not participate in the proceeding. As a result, by the order dated 28.11.2006, the SLSC had also passed the order cancelling his caste certificate. The petitioner had challenged the said order by filing a fresh writ petition being WP(C) 339 of 2009 for quashing the said cancellation order, but by the judgment dated 14.08.2015 (Annexure 10 to the writ petition), the said writ petition was dismissed. During these years no adverse action was taken against the petitioner for cancellation of the schedule caste certificate. 4. The respondent No.2 issued the order No. F.VII-35/95/GS/AMC/1360-82, dated 03.01.2017 for discontinuation of the service of the petitioner in the post of Sanitary Inspector with retrospective effect from 01.01.2007 in exercise of the power under Rule 7A(9) of the Tripura Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Reservation Rules, 1992 (as amended time to time) and in terms of the judgment passed on 14.08.2015 in WP(C) 339 of 2009. As stated, the petitioner was asked to hand over the charge to another Sanitary Inspector. As stated, the petitioner was asked to hand over the charge to another Sanitary Inspector. For purpose of reference, the entire text of the impugned order dated 03.01.2017 is extracted hereunder: “AGARTALA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AGARTALA No. F.VII-35/95/GS/AMC/1360-82 Dated, The 03rd January, 2017 ORDER In pursuance of the rule 7A(9) of the Tripura Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Reservation Rules, 1992 (as amended upto May, 2007) and as per Judgment passed on 14.08.2015 by the Hon’ble High Court of Tripura in case No. WP(C) No. 339 of 2009, the continuation of Ad-hoc appointment of Sri Prabir Kumar Das as Sanitary Inspector which was valid upto 31.12.2016 is hereby discontinued w.e.f. 1.1.2017 and debars him for further continue in the post of Sanitary Inspector as Ad-hoc w.e.f. 1.1.2017. He should hand over his complete official charges if any to Sri Parag Debbarma, Sanitary Inspector, East Zone. Sri Parag Debbarma, Sanitary Inspector of East Zone will look after the works of Sri Das in addition to his normal duties. To, 1. Sri Prabir Kumar Das, Sanitary Inspector on Ad-hoc, AMC 2. Sri Parag Debbarma, Sanitary Inspector, East Zone, AMC Sd/Illigible (Milind Ramteke, IAS) Municipal Commissioner Agartala Municipal Corporation” 5. The respondents No. 1 and 2 by filing reply have stated that the writ petitioner was appointed as Sanitary Inspector purely on adhoc basis for a period of 6(six) months and subsequently the said adhoc appointment was extended time to time. It is pertinent to mention here that as per provision of Section 78 of the Tripura Municipal Act, 1994 the power to create or to abolish any post or class of post of Officers and employees in Municipality vests in the State government. The recruitment to the post of Officers is made through such method as may be notified by the State government from time to time. Though the original service records of the petitioner could not be traced out for dislocation, but the respondents No. 1 and 2 has filed the Office Order dated 31.03.2009 which has provided the procedure for shifting of the records from old office to the new office at the City Centre, Agartala. However, one attestation form has been filed with the said record duly signed by the petitioner. However, one attestation form has been filed with the said record duly signed by the petitioner. The respondents No. 1 and 2 have also produced 100 Points Roster Inspection Register from where it transpires that there are two posts of Sanitary Inspector in total and as per Roster one post is reserved for Scheduled Tribe and the remaining post is posted as Un-reserved. The respondents No.1 and 2 in paragraph 15 of the reply have further stated as under: “That, it appears from the office record of the Roster position in the year 2007 the vacancy position of Sanitary Inspector post was as follows: (i) UR- 1 (ii) ST- 1 (iii) SC- Nil In the year 2007 Sri Tanuj Kr. Saha was appointed to the post of Sanitary Inspector against UR but the post of Sanitary Inspector reserve for ST could not fill (sic.) due to non-available of eligible candidates”. However, the respondents No. 1 and 2 have contended that from the records as is available, it is apparent that the petitioner has claimed him in the attestation form (Annexure R-2 to the reply filed by the respondents No 1 and 2) as the member of the Scheduled Caste. The respondents have asserted that his appointment was considered on adhoc basis as the Scheduled Caste candidate. 6. Mr. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel has submitted that the respondents should have taken a liberal view and retain the petitioner in the service inasmuch as the petitioner has rendered more than 21 years of service as the Sanitary Inspector under the Agartala Municipal Corporation on adhoc basis. Mr. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel has referred to a few decisions of this court where this court had taken a liberal approach by interfering with the order of dismissal after cancellation of the status certificate. In Ramendra Chandra Sarkar vs. The State of Tripura and others [judgment dated 06.05.2015 delivered in WP(C) 323 of 2008], this court has observed as under: “It may be pointed out that in WP(C) No. 66 of 2014 (Dr. Bishnupada Biswas vrs. The State of Tripura and three others) decided on 25.02.2015 this Court had noticed that various doctors had obtained employment by furnishing fake caste certificate but no action was taken against them. Bishnupada Biswas vrs. The State of Tripura and three others) decided on 25.02.2015 this Court had noticed that various doctors had obtained employment by furnishing fake caste certificate but no action was taken against them. Some were only warned and some who had obtained the benefit of promotion on the ground that they belong to the scheduled case were reverted to the lower post. In that case also we had set aside the termination of the petitioner”. In Nepal Majumder vs. The State of Tripura and another [judgment dated 03.08.2016 delivered in WP(C) 68 of 2015], this court on interfering with the impugned order of dismissal of the petitioner from the service, has passed the following order: “The order dated 12.01.2015 issued by the Director of Fisheries, Tripura cancelling the appointment of the petitioner and debarring him from continuing in the post is hereby modified into one of compulsory retirement so as to enable him to receive regular pension”. Mr. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel has thus submitted that in consideration of the long service, the respondents No. 1 and 2 may be directed to take a liberal approach initially to allow the petitioner to continue in the adhoc appointment and thereafter, the petitioner be regularized in the post of Sanitary Inspector from the date when he was appointed as the Sanitary Inspector on adhoc basis. Mr. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel has also advanced one alternative submission that the petitioner was never appointed on the basis of his caste status and hence, no adverse action can be adopted on cancellation of the caste certificate. 7. Mr. Das, learned Advocate General along with Mr. KK Pal, learned counsel has produced the records relating to the appointment of the petitioner. From the note dated 05.06.1998 the following has transpired: “2. Sri Prabir Kr. Das has been appointed to the post of Sanitary Inspector on ad-hoc basis against (S.C.) post. His ad-hoc extension period has been expired on 31.3.98.” From another note dated 05.11.1998 it transpires that the petitioner was interviewed as Schedule Caste candidate and appointed accordingly. From another note dated 05.08.2005, it further transpires that the petitioner was engaged against SC quota. By that note, a proposal was forwarded for regularization of his service. Mr. Das, learned Advocate General has referred to the order dated 19.08.1998 passed in Civil Misc. From another note dated 05.08.2005, it further transpires that the petitioner was engaged against SC quota. By that note, a proposal was forwarded for regularization of his service. Mr. Das, learned Advocate General has referred to the order dated 19.08.1998 passed in Civil Misc. 192 of 1998 arising from Civil Rule No. 195 of 1998 which reads as under: “In this interim matter notice was issued on 19.6.98. The order impugned in the writ petition was issued on 1st June, 1998 by which the scheduled castes certificate earlier issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled on the basis of enquiry made in this regard. The main contention of the writ petitioner is that no enquiry in the eye of law can be said to have been held inasmuch as the writ petitioner was not given adequate opportunity of being heard and also of defending himself by examining all the witnesses examined during enquiry. The apprehension of the writ petitioner is that if the impugned order of cancellation is not stayed the immediate consequence is likely to be the ouster of the writ petitioner from the present post held by him as Inspector under the Agartala Municipal Council. It has been stated that Agartala Municipal Council has not been impleaded as party respondent in the present case. According to Mr. Das, learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, Agartala Municipal Counsel has not been impleaded inasmuch as there is no action taken by the Agartala Municipal Council calling for the interference by this court. In my view, in view of the fact that the consequence of the order of cancellation is likely to be the ouster of the writ petitioner from service atleast the Agartala Municipal Council should be impleaded as a party respondent so that final and effective orders can be passed in the presence of Agartala Municipal Council. In this view of the matter as prayed for I allow impleadment of Agartala Municipal Council as party respondent. Let steps be taken within three days for service of notice upon the newly added respondent. In the interim and until further orders no steps shall be taken to oust the petitioner from the post held by him under Agartala Municipal Council. Let steps be taken within three days for service of notice upon the newly added respondent. In the interim and until further orders no steps shall be taken to oust the petitioner from the post held by him under Agartala Municipal Council. Liberty is, however, given to the respondents to file petition for cancellation or modification of this interim order.” [Emphasis added] From the report of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Vigilance Cell, it has further appeared that the petitioner was appointed on 05.05.1995 as the Sanitary Inspector, Agartala Municipal Corporation, as it then was. The petitioner was appointed against the reserved post of Schedule Caste on the basis of his SC certificate vide No. 634/2473-F.XII-2/SDO/SDR/TW/84-85 dated 26.05.1984 issued by the SDO, Sadar. Finally, Mr. Das, learned Advocate General has pointed out from the application of the petitioner dated 30.01.2006 addressed to the Chief Executive Officer, Agartala Municipal Council. In the said application dated 30.01.2006, the petitioner has inter alia asserted as under: “While appending a copy of the judgment and order dated 04.01.2006 passed in Civil Rule No. 195 of 1998 (my case) along with 5(five) others Writ petitions (common judgment), I beg to state that the purported order of the Sub Divisional Officer, Agartala, dated 01.06.1998 by which my Scheduled Caste Certificate has been cancelled, has been quashed by the Hon’ble High Court and also directing that the benefit which I have been enjoyed as a member of the Scheduled Caste community shall remain unaffected. ******** ******** ******** I fervently request in the circumstances to take into consideration the aforesaid direction of the Hon’ble High Court and to allow me further benefit of service, if any, including promotion as a member of the Scheduled Caste community”. [Emphasis added] Thus, Mr. Das, learned Advocate General has contended that that the petitioner was appointed as the Scheduled Caste candidate on adhoc basis cannot be denied. Moreover, the petitioner was not holding any regular post and as such he has no right to hold the post. In view of the cancellation of the SC certificate, the petitioner has been discontinued. Mr. Das, learned Advocate General has further submitted that the decision as referred by the petitioner for adopting a liberal approach cannot help the petitioner as the petitioner was not holding any Civil post having lien whatsoever on such post. As such, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. Mr. Das, learned Advocate General has further submitted that the decision as referred by the petitioner for adopting a liberal approach cannot help the petitioner as the petitioner was not holding any Civil post having lien whatsoever on such post. As such, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. Moreover, the action taken by the Municipal Commissioner is wholly in conformity to the procedure laid down in the law inasmuch as after the SC certificate is cancelled, the person can be terminated forthwith in terms of Rule 7-A(9) of the Tripura Schedule Tribe and Scheduled Caste Reservation Rules, 1992 without affording any further opportunity. 8. Having considered the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this court is of the view that as it emerges from the record, that the petitioner was engaged as the Sanitary Inspector on adhoc basis on consideration of his caste status. When the respondents have decided to discontinue his service, there is no scope of interference with the said order. That apart, what has been submitted in respect of the liberal approach, this court is of total agreement with Mr. Das, learned Advocate General that the petitioner since was not holding a civil post, those decisions as referred cannot come in aid of the petitioner. Hence this writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.