JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. A. Bhaumik, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, learned G.A. and Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the State-respondents. 2. The appellant-petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 03.06.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in connection with case No. WP(C) No. 758 of 2017 (Sri Ashok Das v. The State of Tripura and 2 Ors.). 3. Briefly stated, while the petitioner was in service, his Scheduled Caste(S.C.) certificate was challenged by the State and the matter was referred to the State Level Scrutiny Committee(SLSC). The SLSC after making thorough inquiry, had cancelled the S.C. certificate of the appellant. The appellant-petitioner challenged such cancellation of his S.C. certificate by filing a writ petition before this court. The said writ petition was dismissed. The appellant-petitioner preferred an intra-court appeal, which was also dismissed. Thereafter, the appellant-petitioner challenged the judgment and order, passed by the Division Bench of this court before the Supreme Court by way of filing a Special Leave Petition. The Hon'ble Supreme Court did not interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by this court upholding the cancellation of the S.C. certificate by the SLSC. 4. The State-respondents, thereafter, had issued order of termination on 17.06.2017 relieving the appellant-petitioner from service. 5. The appellant-petitioner completed 18 years of service. He filed a representation to the authority concerned to consider his case. That representation was rejected after being considered by the State-respondents. 6. The impugned order of termination as well as forfeiture of all service benefits were challenged by way of filing writ petition before this court. The learned Single Judge dismissed the said writ petition holding that:- 'The Division Bench of this court in case of Sri Nepal Majumder v. The State of Tripura and another (supra) was rendered before the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Chairman and Managing Director, Food Corporation of India and others v. Jagdish balaram bahira and others (supra). It is unfortunate that the State Government has adopted different standards for different employees. However, full facts are not before this Court. It is unfortunate that the State Government has adopted different standards for different employees. However, full facts are not before this Court. In any case, an employee whose caste certificate is found to be false and on the basis of such fraudulently obtained caste certificate he has obtained a Government service, cannot argue that the benefits of the past service so obtained by him through fraudulent means may be allowed to be retained for the purpose of pensionary and other benefits, simply because the Government had shown leniency in case of some other cases'. 7. We find no wrong in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. 8. However the appellant-petitioner may file representation to the authority concerned for providing his past service benefits, which if filed would be considered in accordance with law. 9. With the aforesaid directions, the instant writ appeal stands dismissed. The judgment and order dated 03.06.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in connection with case No. WP(C) No. 758 of 2017 has not been interfered.