ORDER : The petitioner approached this Court in writ petition No.30235 of 2004 challenging the order dated 7th July 2004 passed by the Commissioner, Social Welfare Department and sought for quashing of the same. The Writ petition came to be rejected by its order dated 18th January 2005. The petitioner was appointed as lecturer, when this impugned order was issued against him. 2. The case of the respondent is that though the petitioner did not belong to Scheduled Caste but by misrepresentation and by adopting fraudulent method, the petitioner obtained caste certificate and made use to select appoint as a lecturer. The impugned notice was issued alleging that the petitioner had committed fraud, which he had challenged before this Court. This Court, while disposing of the writ petition passed the order as follows: “(i) Writ petition is dismissed; (ii) The finding of the authorities that the petitioner does not belong to Hindu-Bhovi community is upheld; (iii) This judgment shall not affect the petitioner’s appointment as a Lecturer and now as a Selection Grade Lecturer enjoying UGC scale; (iv) It is made clear that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any advantages in future or for any other constitutional or other purpose on the ground that he belongs to Bhovi community a Scheduled Tribe.” 3. In the light of the observation made by this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it attained finality. Now, the petitioner, during the interregnum, has retired from service and is entitled for pension. It is further submitted that after the petitioner has retired from service, the case has been launched against the petitioner in Special (SC/ST) case No.16 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge at Haveri alleging offences under Sections 196, 198, 420 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(ix) of Karnataka Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The petitioner was tried for the said offences. However, the Criminal case ended-up in acquittal. On the basis of the same and the observation made by this Court in Writ Petition referred to above, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner is entitled for pensionary benefits. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner got appointment on the basis of the caste certificate obtained by playing fraud. On the basis of the same and the observation made by this Court in Writ Petition referred to above, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner is entitled for pensionary benefits. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner got appointment on the basis of the caste certificate obtained by playing fraud. It is alleged, though the petitioner does not belong to Bhovi community, falling under Scheduled Caste, but has obtained caste certificate as if he belonged to Scheduled Caste and got appointment as lecturer and also retired from service after attaining superannuation. By virtue of his illegal and fraudulent act he has deprived the very constitutional opportunity that is provided to a person who actually belongs to Scheduled Caste. On the other hand, he had served till the attainment of superannuation. Now, he seeks pensionary benefits. Person who seeks equatorial relief or a constitutional relief shall approach the Court with clean heart and soul. Fraudulent petitions shall not be entertained for any type of consideration by the High Courts. It is not the case of the petitioner that he belonged to a Scheduled Caste for the benefit. He himself has admitted that he does not belong to Scheduled Caste. It is his case that since he has retired from service, he is eligible for pensionary benefits. It is made clear that when a person has committed offence on the constitutional provisions against a person who is entitled for consideration for the purpose of relaxation under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India, he shall not be entitled for any benefits that he seeks for. In the case on hand, the petitioner has served his entire service and retired from service depriving the chance for the eligible candidate. It is also to be observed that when a person commits fraud on the constitutional provisions, he shall not be entitled for any relief from the Court which has extraordinary jurisdiction under Constitution of India. Person who seeks justice, should do justice; person who seeks equity; should do equity. When a person do not approaches the Court with clean hands, is not entitled to seek any benefit. Earlier, by order of this Court it was directed to treat the matter, as if the petitioner was not belonging to Bhovi and further he shall not be entitled for any further benefit. When a person do not approaches the Court with clean hands, is not entitled to seek any benefit. Earlier, by order of this Court it was directed to treat the matter, as if the petitioner was not belonging to Bhovi and further he shall not be entitled for any further benefit. That observation made gives relief virtually. That is not the intention of the Constitution and reservation and privilege given to the socially and economically deprived class of the society for ages together. 5. In this regard it is beneficial to refer the observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paragraphs 26 to 29 in the judgment of R. VISHWANATHA PILLAI v. STATE OF KERALA & OTHERS, reported in (2004) 2 SCC 105 . The same read as hereunder: “26. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. In Kumari Madhuri Patil's case (supra) the Court while upholding the cancellation of the social status fraudulently obtained by the candidate allowed her to appear in the final year examination of the MBBS course with the rider that she would not be entitled to take any benefit in future on the basis of the social caste certificate obtained by her. It was observed: "18. The Delay in the process is inevitable but that factor should neither be considered to be relevant nor be an aid to complete the course of study. But for the fact that she has completed the entire course except to appear for the final examination, we would have directed to debar her from prosecuting the studies and appearing in the examination. In this factual situation no useful purpose would be served to debar her from appearing for the examination of final year MBBS. Therefore, we uphold the cancellation of the social status as Mahadeo Koli fraudulently obtained by Km Suchita Laxman Patil, but she be allowed to appear for the final year examination of MBBS course. She will not, however be entitled in future for any benefits on the basis of the fraudulent social status as Mahadeo Koli. However, this direction should not be treated and used as a precedent in future cases to give any similar direction since the same defeats constitutional goals." [emphasis supplied] 27. In State of Maharashtra Vs. She will not, however be entitled in future for any benefits on the basis of the fraudulent social status as Mahadeo Koli. However, this direction should not be treated and used as a precedent in future cases to give any similar direction since the same defeats constitutional goals." [emphasis supplied] 27. In State of Maharashtra Vs. Milind & Ors., (supra), a Constitution Bench of this Court while permitting the candidate to retain the degree obtained by him even though his claim as member of the Scheduled Tribe was rejected observed: "38. Respondent 1 joined the medical course for the year 1985 -86. Almost 15 years have passed by now. We are told he has already completed the course and may be he is practising as a doctor. In this view and at this length of time it is for nobody's benefit to annul his admission. Huge amount is spent on each candidate for completion of joining of medical course. Bo doubt, one Scheduled Tribe candidate was deprived of joining medical course by the admission given to Respondent 1. If nay action is taken against Respondent 1, it may lead to depriving the service of a doctor to the society on whom public money has already been spent. In these circumstances, this judgment shall not affect the degree obtained by him and his practising as a doctor. But we make it clear that he cannot claim to belong to the Scheduled Tribe covered by the Scheduled Tribes Order. In other words, he cannot take advantage of the Scheduled Tribes Order any further or for any other constitutional purpose. Having regard to the passage of time, in the given circumstances, including interim orders passed by this Court in SLP (C) No. 16372 of 1985 and other related affairs, we make it clear that the admissions and appointments that have become final, shall remain unaffected by this judgment." [emphasis supplied] 28. In this case we find that the appellant had joined the Regional Engineering College in the year 1992. He completed the course of his studies in the year 1996 under the interim orders of this Court which were subject to the final orders to be passed in the writ petition. In this case we find that the appellant had joined the Regional Engineering College in the year 1992. He completed the course of his studies in the year 1996 under the interim orders of this Court which were subject to the final orders to be passed in the writ petition. No purpose would be served in withholding the declaration of the result on the basis of the examination already taken by him or depriving him of the degree in case he passes the examination. In terms of the orders passed by the Constitution Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Milind & Ors., (Supra) we direct that his result be declared and he be allowed to take his degree with the condition he will not be treated as a Scheduled Caste candidate in future either in obtaining service or for any other benefits flowing from the caste certificate obtained by him. His caste certificate has been ordered to be cancelled. Henceforth, he will be treated as a person belonging to the general category for all purposes. 29. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 15.3.2002 passed by the High Court of Kerala is set aside.” 6. It is also beneficial to refer to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Paragraphs 10 & 11 of the judgment in MEGHAMALA v G. NARASIMHA REDDY, reported in SCALE 2010 8 237. In paragraphs 10 and 11 of the judgment, it is observed thus: “10. It is settled proposition of law that where an applicant gets an order/office by making misrepresentation or playing fraud upon the competent Authority, such order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. "Fraud avoids all judicial acts ecclesiastical or temporal." (Vide S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu (dead) by L.Rs. Vs. Jagannath (dead) by L.Rs. & Ors. AIR 1994 SC 853 ). In Lazarus Estate Ltd. Vs. Besalay 1956 All. E.R. 349), the Court observed without equivocation that "no judgment of a Court, no order of a Minister can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud, for fraud unravels everything." In Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation Vs. M/s. GAR Re-Rolling Mills & Anr. AIR 1994 SC 2151 ; and State of Maharashtra & Ors. Vs. Prabhu (1994) 2 SCC 481 . M/s. GAR Re-Rolling Mills & Anr. AIR 1994 SC 2151 ; and State of Maharashtra & Ors. Vs. Prabhu (1994) 2 SCC 481 . this Court observed that a writ Court, while exercising its equitable jurisdiction, should not act as to prevent perpetration of a legal fraud as the courts are obliged to do justice by promotion of good faith. "Equity is, also, known to prevent the law from the crafty evasions and sub-letties invented to evade law." In Smt. Shrisht Dhawan Vs. M/s. Shaw Brothers. AIR 1992 SC 1555 , it has been held as under :- "Fraud and collusion vitiate even the most solemn proceedings in any civilised system of jurisprudence. It is a concept descriptive of human conduct." 11. In United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rajendra Singh & Ors. AIR 2000 SC 1165 , this Court observed that "Fraud and justice never dwell together" (fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant) and it is a pristine maxim which has never lost its temper over all these centuries. The ratio laid down by this Court in various cases is that dishonesty should not be permitted to bear the fruit and benefit to the persons who played fraud or made misrepresentation and in such circumstances the Court should not perpetuate the fraud. (See District Collector & Chairman, Vizianagaram Social Welfare Residential School Society, Vizianagaram & Anr. Vs. M. Tripura Sundari Devi (1990) 3 SCC 655 ; Union of India & Ors. Vs. M. Bhaskaran (1995) Suppl. 4 SCC 100; Vice Chairman, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Anr. Vs. Girdharilal Yadav (2004) 6 SCC 325; State of Maharashtra v. Ravi Prakash Babulalsing Parmar (2007) 1 SCC 80 ; Himadri Chemicals Industries Ltd. Vs. Coal Tar Refining Company AIR 2007 SC 2798 ; and Mohammed Ibrahim & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Anr. (2009) 8 SCC 751 ). 7. Therefore, the person who plays fraud and gets the benefit of appointment and the court extended its aid and helped him in retaining that benefit of appointment only to the extent that term extends, is not entitled to further benefits flowing from the appointment, which was illegally obtained, such as pension. In that view of the matter, I do not find any reason to allow this petition. Petition accordingly stands dismissed with costs.