In  CWP No.18033 of 2017(O&M)-PUNJ HC- Petitioner wasn’t entitled to get SC certificate as he belonged to Muslim Community: P&H holds appointment of Professor to be void ab initio 
Justice Jaishree Thakur [17-05-2023]

feature-top

Read Order:Abid Ali Vs. State Of Haryana And Others 

 

Tulip Kanth

 

Chandigarh, June 7, 2023:While observing that the petitioner, being a Muslim, is not entitled to get a Scheduled Caste Certificate, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition seeking quashing of order vide which the petitioner, who was working as Assistant Professor under the Self Financing Scheme was removed from service of the University.  

 

“...this Court is of the opinion that petitioner was not entitled to be issued an SC certificate, being a person belonged to Muslim Community”, Justice Jaishree Thakur asserted.

 

The facts of this case were such that in the year 2006, the petitioner namely Abid Ali started working as contractual Teaching Associate in the respondent -University. In the same year i.e. 2006, the University issued an advertisement for filling up 5 posts of Lecturers in the Department of Journalism & Mass Communication under SFS. Out of said 5 posts under SFS, one post was reserved for SC category and remaining four were unreserved. 

 

The petitioner applied for appointment under both categories of posts i.e. budgeted and SFS.The petitioner was selected and appointed as Lecturer under both the schemes i.e. budgeted as well as SFS. In the appointment letter issued for budgeted post of Lecturer, the subject was mentioned as appointment to the post of Lecturer (SC) on temporary basis, whereas in the appointment letter issued under SFS, it was mentioned as appointment to the post of Lecturer (under SFS). The petitioner joined as Lecturer under SFS under Department of Journalism and Mass Communication.

 

Thereafter, a complaint was made against the petitioner alleging therein that the petitioner obtained a job while claiming himself to be an SC candidate, as belonged to Julaha community, whereas he couldn’t be selected under SC category, being a Muslim. The Deputy Commissioner, Karnal stated that there was no entry in the name of Abid Ali regarding issuance of SC Certificate and the Registrar Issued a memorandum of charges and it was proposed by the competent authority to take action against him as per Agreement.  The petitioner submitted his reply stating that he had verified the caste certificate from the office of City Magistrate, Karnal and the caste certificate issued to the petitioner was issued vide Sr. No.2299 instead of 2348.

 

Thereafter, a decision was taken in the meeting of the Executive Council  for removal of the petitioner from service, which shall not be disqualification for future employment. Aggrieved against this order whereby the petitioner had been removed from service, he approached the High Court.The issues before the Bench was whether the SC certificate was forged or obtained by misrepresentation and  whether the petitioner had benefitted from the certificate and if he could be allowed to continue in service.

 

The Bench reaffirmed that a person to have the status of Scheduled Caste must profess Hinduism or any other religion as specified in para 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as Presidential Order), as issued by the President in exercise of the power conferred upon him under Article 341 of the Constitution of India. 

 

“In the absence of any material available before this Court that petitioner  herein is professing Hinduism or any other religion as specified in para 3 of the  Presidential Order, this Court is of the opinion that petitioner was not entitled to be issued an SC certificate, being a person belonged to Muslim Community”, the Bench held. 

 

The Court further made it clear that the petitioner had a case if he could prove that he had obtained more marks than the last selected candidate of General Category and therefore, applying the principle of horizontal reservation, he was to be given appointment against the post of General Category to grant benefit of reservation to next Scheduled Caste candidate. The Bench rejected the argument saying that he was given appointment against 4th post of General category as according to the recommendation of the interview committee, the petitioner was recommended for appointment under SC category.

 

It was also noticed that the petitioner was appointed in the year 2007 and till today, he had rendered 16 years of service. “This Court is of the opinion that since the appointment of the petitioner based on the Scheduled Caste certificate to which he was not entitled to, is void ab initio, he cannot get the benefit of length of service for which he was not eligible at the first instance”, the Bench said.

 

The Court was of the view that even though the petitioner might not have misrepresented at the time of obtaining an SC certificate or obtained the same fraudulently, but since he claimed and was given benefit under the said certificate to which he was definitely not entitled to, he couldn’t be allowed to continue in service. 

 

However, the Bench held that the salary and other emoluments paid to the petitioner shall not be recovered. The government accommodation, if retained by the petitioner has to be vacated by him within a period of two months, the Bench ordered while dismissing the petition.

 

Add a Comment