ORDER : 1. The petitioner has fled this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the order/report dated 26.05.2008 (Annexure P/3) passed by the respondent No.3-The Caste Certificate High Level Scrutiny Committee (for short ‘the Committee’), whereby the petitioner’s claim has been rejected recording the finding that petitioner’s caste ‘Panika’ falls under the category of ‘Other Backward Class’, and recommended to cancel his candidature & all the promotions given to him during his service period against post reserved for ‘Scheduled Caste’, whereas the petitioner’s claim is that he belongs to Caste ‘Panika’, which comes under the category of ‘Scheduled Tribe’. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner belongs to caste ‘Panika’, which comes under the category of Scheduled Tribe as per the notification issued from time to time by the State Government. The petitioner, after completing his education, applied for the caste certificate before the competent authority. On 23.01.1987, Tahsildar, Rajnandgaon, after due and requisite verification, issued a caste certificate to the petitioner that the petitioner is a member of Scheduled Tribe. On the basis of the said caste certificate, the petitioner applied for the employment in the Forest Department and subsequently got selected for the post of ‘Forest Guard’. After joining the duty by the petitioner, a notice was issued by the employer/respondent No.2 regarding verification and genuineness of the caste certificate of the petitioner. The petitioner appeared and submitted the requisite documents regarding his social status and genuineness of his caste certificate before the Committee. The respondent No.3 started its enquiry and sent its report to the respondent No.2 contending that the petitioner is not a member of ‘Scheduled Caste’ and the Committee has also recommended to cancel his candidature and all the promotions given to him during his service period against post reserved for ‘Scheduled Caste’. Thus, the petitioner has fled the instant petition for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 26.05.2008 (Annexure P-3) of the Committee. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 20.01.1987, the petitioner was appointed as ‘Forest Guard’ in the office of respondent No.2 against the reserved category post. Before joining the post, the petitioner applied for caste certificate (Annexure P-1) and, on 23.01.1987, the competent authority issued the caste certificate to the petitioner that the petitioner belongs to a member of ‘Scheduled Tribe’. Before joining the post, the petitioner applied for caste certificate (Annexure P-1) and, on 23.01.1987, the competent authority issued the caste certificate to the petitioner that the petitioner belongs to a member of ‘Scheduled Tribe’. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that at the time of his joining, he written his caste as ‘Panika’ (Scheduled Tribe) in service book (Annexure P-4). The Committee has erroneously started enquiry behind the back of the petitioner without affording opportunity of hearing and recorded the finding that the petitioner was got selected against the post reserved for ‘Scheduled Caste’ and the caste ‘Panika’ does not fall under the category of ‘Scheduled Caste’ and passed the impugned order dated 26.05.2008 (Annexure P-3). Learned counsel also submits that the Committee has not made any proper enquiry prior to giving the report (Annexure P-3) regarding the caste of the petitioner as per the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Ku. Madhuri Patil & Anr. V. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development Thane & Ors. reported in 1995 AIR 94. The report of the Committee is illegal, arbitrary and full of malafde, therefore, the same deserves to be quashed. It is next submitted that relying upon the report (Annexure P-3) of the Committee, the respondent No.2 has started disciplinary action against the petitioner, whereas the report is itself illegal and arbitrary. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalapur, in the matter of Lakhandas Manikpuri and Anr. V. The Central Warehousing Corporation and 4 Ors. reported in 2001 (5) M.P.H.T. 112 (DB). 4. Learned counsel for respondents submits that the Committee has passed the order dated 26.05.2008 (Annexure P-3) by which it has recommended to cancel the petitioner’s appointment because his appointment as ‘Forest Guard’ was not found in accordance with terms and conditions of reservation criteria. Learned State counsel further submits that the Committee has also recommended to cancel all the promotions given to him during his service period against post reserved for ‘Scheduled Caste’. Learned State counsel further submits that the Committee has also recommended to cancel all the promotions given to him during his service period against post reserved for ‘Scheduled Caste’. The Committee has passed a reasoned and speaking order (Annexure P-3), which reveals that the petitioner was given proper opportunity of hearing and he was asked to submit documents pertaining to his caste ‘Panika’ which comes under the reserved category against which he has secured appointment but he could not produce the records as sought for by the Committee. Hence, the impugned order passed by the Committee sufers from no infrmity and the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 6. From perusal of the documents and record, it appears that on 20.01.1987, the petitioner was appointed on the post of ‘Forest Guard’ in the office of respondent No.2. As per appointment letter (Annexure P-6), the petitioner’s name is placed at Sl. No.31 – Mohandas Manikpuri and the category against his name is written as ‘Scheduled Caste’. In the same list, at Sl. No.18 and 19, there are two candidates from ‘Panika’ caste and their category is written as ‘Scheduled Tribe’. 7. In the matter of Lakhandas (supra), Division Bench of High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur, held in para 6 and 7 as under :- “6. The question is whether the appellant secured appointment by production of false/forged certificate. This does not appear to be so. He had presented the facts before the respondents fairly, since it was known to him that his caste was a reserved caste, as per Government Notification dated November 25, 1960, but he did not know that this notification was superseded by subsequent notification dated December 8, 1971, whereby “Panika” has been omitted from the category of Scheduled Tribes. It is understandable that for a person of tribe, it was difficult to notice the change, when it was not noticed by the respondents. 7. With this background, it is difficult to hold that the appellant made conscious attempt to procure false/forged caste certificate to secure the appointment. After all, it was issued by the Naib Tahsildar after verification of Patwari of the area. In any case, the certificate may have turned out to be inaccurate, but it is not forged nor obtained intentionally with a view to secure appointment. After all, it was issued by the Naib Tahsildar after verification of Patwari of the area. In any case, the certificate may have turned out to be inaccurate, but it is not forged nor obtained intentionally with a view to secure appointment. At the stage of procuring the appointment as daily rated Sweeper, he was Scheduled Tribe and the change took place afterwards when he was appointed Watchman.” 8. In the present case also, the petitioner obtained caste certificate from Tahsildar, Rajnandgaon, which shows that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe community. At the time of petitioner’s joining in the office of respondent No.2, he mentioned his category in service book as ‘Schedule Tribe’ (Annexure P-4), and in his reply, he had narrated all facts before the respondent authorities fairly and he always mentioned his category as ‘Scheduled Tribe’. The petitioner never claimed that his caste ‘Panika’ comes under the category of ‘Scheduled Caste’. 9. The Committee, in para 9 of its report (Annexure P-3), has held as under :- ^^9- mi;qZDr rF;ksa dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq;s lfefr bl fu"d"kZ ij igqaprh gS fd Jh eksgunkl ekfudiqjh nqxZ ftys ls ifudk tkfr dk gSA ifudk tkfr vuqlwfpr tkfr dh lwph esa 'kkfey ugh gSA vr,o ;g vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd %& 9-1 Jh eksgunkl ekfudiqjh us vuqlwfpr tkfr ugha gksrs gq;s Hkh vuqlwfpr tkfr ds fy, vkjf{kr in ij xyr fu;qfDr ,oa inksUufr izkIr fd;k gSA 9-2 ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds vuqlkj xyr fu;qfDr muds fu;ksDrk }kjk fujLr fd tkuk gSA vr% iz/kku eq[; oulaj{kd] NŸkhlxढ jk;iqj dks ys[k fd;k tkrk gS fd vuqlwfpr tkfr ds izek.k i= ds fcuk Jh eksgunkl ekfudiqjh dh vuqlwfpr tkfr ds fy;s vkjf{kr ouj{kd ds in ij nh xbZ fu;qfDr ,oa vuqlwfpr tkfr laoxZ ds fy;s vkjf{kr inksa ij nh xbZ inksUufr;ksa dks fujLr djus dh dk;Zokgh djsaA 10. In the instant petition, it is not the allegation of respondents that the petitioner fled any false/forged caste certificate to secure job in government department. The Committee has also recorded its finding that the petitioner’s caste is ‘Panika’. After due verification, the caste certificate (Annexure P-1) of ‘Scheduled Tribe’ was issued to the petitioner by Nayab Tahsildar, Rajnandgaon. In the instant petition, it is not the allegation of respondents that the petitioner fled any false/forged caste certificate to secure job in government department. The Committee has also recorded its finding that the petitioner’s caste is ‘Panika’. After due verification, the caste certificate (Annexure P-1) of ‘Scheduled Tribe’ was issued to the petitioner by Nayab Tahsildar, Rajnandgaon. At the time of procuring appointment in the office of respondent No.2, the petitioner was a member of ‘Scheduled Tribe’ and it is also clear from appointment letter (Annexure P-6) that caste ‘Panika’ comes under the category of ‘Scheduled Tribe’ as stated at Sl. No. 18 and 19, but at Sl. No.31 where the petitioner’s name is written, his category is mentioned as ‘Scheduled Caste’. The petitioner has been in service for more than 33 years. He did not procure the appointment on false/forged caste certificate. At the stage of initial appointment, he was a member of ‘Scheduled Tribe’ and as per Annexure P-4, he declared himself to be the member of ‘Schedule Tribe’ and the said fact is duly supported by his caste certificate (Annexure P-1). Thus, looking to the facts that the petitioner is serving for more than 33 years, it would not be desirable in the interest of justice to terminate his services. 11. Consequently, the petition is allowed and report dated 26.05.2008 (Annexure P-3) is hereby quashed.