ORDER : 1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 04.11.2015 (Annexure P/3) passed by the respondent No.3, whereby the petitioner’s services to the post of Peon has been terminated pursuant to the report of the High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee (for short ‘the Committee’), whereby the petitioner’s claim has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner does not belong to ‘Gond’ Scheduled Tribes caste, whereas he belongs to ‘Gada’ Scheduled Castes community and prior to 1971, his ancestral originally resides in State of Odisha. 2. Brief facts of the case, as projected by the petitioner, are that, on 30.08.1989, the petitioner was appointed as Peon in the office of Respondent No.3 against Scheduled Tribe “Gond” category under the special recruitment drive for the special category and class of people. The caste certificate of ‘Gond” community has been issued on 21.05.1986 by the office of Collector (Adim Jati Harijan Kalyan Shakha) Raipur. The Department, after examining the caste certificate, educational certificate and other documents relating to the testimonials, offered appointment to the petitioner. During the service period of the petitioner, on the basis of anonymous complaint regarding his caste and certificate, the Respondent No.4-Committee initiated inquiry regarding his caste certificate and vide order dated 20. 08.2015, the Committee came to the conclusion that the petitioner belongs to ‘Ganda’ (Scheduled Caste) and not ‘Gond’ (Scheduled Tribe) & invalidated his caste certificate issued by the Collector and communicated its report to the Department/Respondent No.3 vide letter dated 26.10.2015 with order dated 20.08.2015 (Annexure P/2 colly). Thereafter, the Respondent No.3, pursuant to the order dated 20.08.2015 of the Respondent No.4/ Committee, the Respondent No.3 passed an order dated 04.11.2015 (Annexure P/3) terminating the services of the petitioner. Thereafter, against the order of termination dated 04.11.2015, the petitioner, on 13.11.2015, preferred an appeal (Annexure P/4) before the Respondent No.1 under the provision of Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal), Rules, 1966, which was dismissed by order dated 22.10.2016 (Annexure P/4 colly) by the Respondent No.1 holding it to be not maintainable in view of Chhattisgarh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Status Certification) Act, 2013 (for short the ‘Act, 2013). Hence, this petition by the petitioner seeking following relief(s) :- “A. The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records pertaining to the present case from the concerned authorities. B. The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s) in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order impugned Dt. 26.10.2015 and 20.08.2015 (Annexure P-2) respectively and order Dt. 22.10.2016 (Annexure P-4), issued by the Respondents. C. The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petitioner to continue in service without giving further benefits(s) of the caste certificate of “Gond”; as produced by the petitioner at the time of service if certificate found to be incorrect in the facts and circumstances of the case in view of judicial pronouncement(s). D. The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case with cost.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has secured appointment on the post of Peon in the office of Respondent No.3 on the basis of caste certificate of “Gond’ (Scheduled Tribe) community duly issued by the Collected after submitting related documents but the Committee in an arbitrary manner invalidated the caste certificate of the petitioner and the appeal preferred against the order of Committee has been summarily rejected by the Respondent No.1 being not maintainable, is bad in law. The Respondent No.4 while passing the order dated 20.08.2015 and communication dated 26.10.2015 thereof did not consider the case of the petitioner in its true perspective and even during the enquiry, it has not given proper and sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to disprove the allegation, as such, the order dated 26.10.2015 (Annexure P/2) and consequent dismissal from service vide order dated 4.11.2015 (Annexure P/3) is completely bad in law. Learned counsel also submits that at the time of appointment of the petitioner, the Department has verified the testimonials as well as caste certificate, therefore, further enquiry relating to the caste of the petitioner to the effect was not proper. Learned counsel also submits that at the time of appointment of the petitioner, the Department has verified the testimonials as well as caste certificate, therefore, further enquiry relating to the caste of the petitioner to the effect was not proper. Learned counsel also submits that the Respondent No.3, in mechanical manner, without giving proper opportunity of hearing straightway passed the order of dismissal from service of the petitioner without considering the fact that the petitioner has been working in the Department for more than 26 years and, as such, his services is liabel to be protected in view of circular of the Govt. of Chhattisgarh. The Department instead of removal from service on the basis of incorrect certificate should have been allowed the petitioner to remain in the service without benefit of caste certificate or further any benefit in future on the basis of said caste certificate as per judicial pronouncement of the Court even there is a circular in this regard of the State of Chhattisgarh, G.A.D., dated 01.10.2011 (Annexure P/5). Last but not the least submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that though the caste certificate of the petitioner of “Gond” (Scheduled Tribe) community has been invalidated by the Committee but the fact is that he is a member of Scheduled category, therefore, his services is liable to be protected. 4. Reliance has been placed on the decision of this Court in the matter of Dhannu Das Burde & Ors. v. State of C.G. & ors. reported in 2016 LawSuit (Chh) 307. 5. Learned counsel for respondents/State strongly opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submits that in the instant petition, order dated 20.08.2015 (Annexure P/2) passed by Committee is under challenged. The said Committee is a quasi judicial authority and order passed by the Committee is as per its jurisdiction. Hence, this petition is not maintainable at all. Learned State counsel further submits that on a complaint regarding illegal appointment obtained by the petitioner on the basis of false caste certificate, vide letter dated 03.05.2014 (Annexure R/1), the matter was referred/forwarded to the Respondent No.4 – Committee for its enquiry. After receipt of aforesaid letter (Annexure R/1) requesting for conducting inquiry about the caste certificate of the petitioner, the Respondent No.4 registered the case and initiated/started the proceeding about the caste certificate of the petitioner. After receipt of aforesaid letter (Annexure R/1) requesting for conducting inquiry about the caste certificate of the petitioner, the Respondent No.4 registered the case and initiated/started the proceeding about the caste certificate of the petitioner. Learned State counsel also submits that the matter has been investigated by the vigilance cell of respondent No.4 and after due verification of the case & documents of the petitioner, the Vigilance Team gave detailed report in which all the aspects were dealt with. Before the Vigilance Cell, the petitioner was afforded opportunity of hearing by issuing show cause notice dated 22.06.2015 and the petitioner has duly replied the said show cause notice. In all the previous record, the petitioner’s caste is written/mentioned as ‘Ganda’, which is Scheduled Caste category and in his school certificates, the petitioner’s caste is recorded as ‘Gond’ which falls under the Scheduled Tribe. Thus, after due verification, the Respondent No.4- Committee does not find the petitioner to be a member of Scheduled Tribe (Gond community) by caste and the Respondent No.4 Committee has not found the petitioner eligible for the benefit of reservation of Scheduled Tribe category as per the provisions contained in the Rules, 2013 and the rules made there under and ultimately passed the impugned order dated 20.08.2015 (Annexure P/2), whereby the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner showing him to be a member of Scheduled Tribe category (Gond) has been cancelled and it has been directed to act accordingly. Learned counsel also submits that the appeal has already been rejected by the Respondent No.1 because there is no provision in the Act, 2013 to prefer an appeal. The Committee has passed the order after following due procedure as required by the Hon’ble Apex and the direction given in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & Ors. v. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development & Ors. ( 1997 5 SCC 437 ) and the case of Director, Tribal Welfare, State of Andra Pradesh v. Laveti Giri and Ors ( 1995 4 SCC 32 : 1995 AIR 1506). Thus, the instant petition being without any merit may be dismissed. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. ( 1997 5 SCC 437 ) and the case of Director, Tribal Welfare, State of Andra Pradesh v. Laveti Giri and Ors ( 1995 4 SCC 32 : 1995 AIR 1506). Thus, the instant petition being without any merit may be dismissed. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. It transpires from the record that the petitioner secured appointment on the post of Peon in the Department of Respondent No.3 on the basis of caste certificate of ‘Gond community which falls under Scheduled Tribe and he had been working in the Department since 12.09.1989. After receiving the complaint regarding the caste of the petitioner, the matter was examined by the Committee and the Committee has arrived at finding that the petitioner belongs to “Ganda” caste (Scheduled Caste) category and not “Gond” (Scheduled Tribe) category. 8. While dealing with the issue of false/forged caste certificate, this Court in the matter of Dhannu (supra) held in para 36 and 40 as under :- “36. From the aforesaid analysis, it is quite vivid that the petitioners were granted the status of ST category by the competent authority way back and their date of issuance of caste certificate has been mentioned in preceding paragraph. They were granted the certificate of ST “Halba” bona fidely which was found to be “Halba Koshti”. The legal position has been made clear by the Constitution Bench decision in this regard by the Supreme Court in the judgment of Milind delivered on28-11-2000 protecting the service benefit of those appointments that have become final. All petitioners were appointed prior to 29-11-2000 as mentioned in foregoing paragraph that all were appointed prior to 28-11-2000. The Caste Scrutiny Committee constituted under the Act of 2013 found the petitioners to be Halba Koshti and further extended the benefit of circular of the Central Government dated 10-8-2010 which is based on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Milind and the circular dated 1-10-2011 which is also based on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Milind as well as the office memorandum of the Central Government dated 10-8-2010. The State Government by its circular dated 11-1-2016 has withdrawn it earlier circular dated 1-10-2011. 40. The State Government by its circular dated 11-1-2016 has withdrawn it earlier circular dated 1-10-2011. 40. Since the petitioners were bona fidely granted ST status by the competent authority long back and their appointments have become final before 28-11-2000, they are entitled for their service protection as per the decision rendered by the Supreme in Milind case followed by Vilas, Kavita Solunke and R. Unnikrishnan, and by circular dated 10-08-2010 the Central Government has also followed that judgment and the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee has also held the petitioners to be entitled for service protection and benefit of the circular granted to the petitioners cannot be taken away with retrospective effect and therefore the order dated 11-1-2016 (Annexure P/1) so far it directs the Administrative Departments to take action in respect of the protection granted by circular dated 1-10-2011 is held to be bad qua the writ petitioners herein only and it is held that the petitioners are entitled for their service protection as held in Milind followed in Vilas, Kavita Solunke and R. Unnikrishnan as well as by the office order of the Central Government dated 10-8-2010 and it is directed that no action will be taken to withdraw the benefit already granted by the High Power Certification Scrutiny Committee in its order in terms of the order dated 1-10-2011.” 9. In the case in hand, the caste certificate of ‘Gond’ community of the petitioner which falls under Scheduled Tribe category was issued on 21.05.1986 by the Collector and in his school certificate also the caste of the petitioner is also mentioned/written as “Gond”. It is not the objection of the respondents that the petitioner secured appointed in the office of Respondent No.3 by playing fraud. It is evident in the report of the Committee that at the time of first admission of the petitioner in the school, the caste was asked verbally by the Principal Pathak and the petitioner’s caste was told by his father as “Gada” ¼ xkMk ½, but caste “Gond” was recorded in the school admission register by the Principal. The report of Committee further reflects/established the fact that earlier the petitioner has also stated that had the caste certificate been issued on the basis of revenue record ( fely fjdkWMZ ), the petitioner would have been registered as “Ganda” Scheduled Caste. The report of Committee further reflects/established the fact that earlier the petitioner has also stated that had the caste certificate been issued on the basis of revenue record ( fely fjdkWMZ ), the petitioner would have been registered as “Ganda” Scheduled Caste. From the overall, it is crystal clear that though the caste certificate of the petitioner of “Gond” (Scheduled Tribe) community has been invalidated but the fact is that he is a member of Scheduled category. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner had been working since 28.08.1989 for more than 20 years, the impugned order dated 04.11.2015 (Annexure P/3) and appellate order dated 22.10.2016 (Annexure P/4) is set aside. The petitioner is held to be entitled for all the consequential benefits. However, it is made clear that the petitioner and his legal heirs shall not be entitled for any benefits in future from his caste certificate of “Gond” caste (Scheduled Tribe), which has been invalidated by the Committee. 11. The petition is allowed with the aforesaid direction. No order as to cost(s).