1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2851 OF 2024 (ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) NO. 7707/2018) VIJAYLAKSHMI APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 O R D E R CIVIL APPEAL No. 2851 OF 2024 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 13 th November, 2017, passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in CWP No.3310 of 2016, whereby the Writ Petition filed by her, praying inter alia for quashing of the order dated 1 st January, 2015, passed by the respondent no.2- Naib Tehsildar, Holi, Distt-Chamba, Himachal Pradesh cancelling her Caste Certificate. 3. By the impugned order, the High Court noted that it is not in dispute that, the appellant did not belong to a Scheduled Tribe Category by birth but was married to a person belonging to the said category and therefore, she could not have gained the status of a person belonging to the scheduled tribe category. A person who does not belong to a scheduled caste/scheduled tribe category by
2 birth, cannot gain the status of that caste or tribe only by marrying a person belonging to the said category. As a result, the appellant’s appointment to the post of a Primary Teacher in the respondent no.3- Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Dehradun under the reserved quota of Scheduled Tribe, was set aside on the respondent no.2 - Naib Tehsildar issuing a letter cancelling her the Scheduled Tribe certificate. Consequently, the Disciplinary Authority dismissed the appellant from service vide order dated 18 th February, 2015. The appellant preferred an appeal against the said order, which came to be dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide Order dated 12 th /14 th September, 2016. The writ petition preferred by the appellant has also been dismissed by the impugned order. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant states that this is not a case where the appellant had fabricated the documents for obtaining a caste certificate. She had applied for a caste certificate after her marriage and the said certificate was issued by the Competent Authority in due course. It was only subsequently decided by the authorities that a person marrying into a Scheduled Caste Family/Scheduled Tribe category would not be entitled to claim a caste certificate if the said person, who is seeking such a certificate, does not belong to a scheduled caste/scheduled tribe category by birth. 5. A perusal of the records shows that it is not in dispute that the appellant was born in a Brahmin community and she got married to a person who belonged to the scheduled tribe category. It was on the strength of a caste certificate issued in her favour after her marriage declaring her as a person belonging to a
3 scheduled tribe category, that the appellant had applied for appointment to the post of a Primary Teacher under the quota reserved for the scheduled tribe category and she was so appointed on the said post on 3 rd September, 1986. 6. Based on a complaint received by the respondent No. 3 – School regarding forged/false certificates being submitted by employees for obtaining jobs, verification of the records of the employees was undertaken by the Department and it was in the course of the said verification that it transpired that the appellant herein had submitted a scheduled tribe category certificate wherein she was described as the wife of a person belonging to the scheduled tribe category. 7. The appellant was directed to submit the correct scheduled tribe category certificate, which for obvious reasons, she could not submit. As a result, she was charge-sheeted and thereafter, the respondent no.2 – Naib Tehsildar issued an order cancelling the scheduled tribe category certificate issued in her favour. This was followed by the termination of her services in the respondent no.3 – School. 8. We may note that during all this time, the appellant had served in the respondent no.3 - School for the period extending over 29 years and on the work front, her career was flawless. The appellant could not be blamed for the situation as she had not submitted a false caste certificate to secure job for a post reserved for the scheduled tribe category. She had submitted a caste certificate obtained from the office of the respondent no.2 - Naib Tehsildar that clearly stated that she was the wife of a person belonging to the scheduled tribe category. So
4 there was no misrepresentation on her part. 9. This being the position, we are of the opinion that it is a fit case where the provision of Article 142 of the Constitution of India ought to be invoked to do substantiate justice by converting the order of termination from services into an order of compulsory retirement. We order accordingly. 10. The order of termination of the services of the appellant is converted into an order of compulsory retirement. As a consequence of the aforesaid order, the service benefits as the appellant may be entitled to, on being compulsorily retired shall be computed and released in her favour within six weeks from today. 11. The appeal is disposed of on the above terms while leaving the parties to bear their own expenses. W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 1. Application seeking exemption from filing official translation is allowed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in light of the orders passed in Civil Appeal No. 2851/2024, he does not wish to press this Writ Petition. 3. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed as not pressed. ……………………....................J. (HIMA KOHLI) ……………………....................J. (SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA) New Delhi 21 st February, 2024
5 ITEM NO.15 COURT NO.11 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7707/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2017 in CWP No. 3310/2016 passed by the High Court Of Himachal Pradesh At Shimla) VIJAYLAKSHMI Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 (X) (IA No. 46796/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 21-02-2024 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Dr. M.p. Raju, Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR Mr. Alok Kumar Prasad, Adv. Mr. K.k. Vinosh, Adv. Mr. Ravi Sagar, Adv. Mr. Remish Lakra, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. D.k. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Tavleen Singh, Adv. Mr. Vallabhi Shukla, Adv. Mr. Joginder Mann, Adv. Mr. Divyansh Thakur, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR Mr. Anil Nag, AOR
6 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Leave granted. 2. The appeal ( Civil Appeal No. 2851 OF 2024) is disposed of in terms of the signed order along with the pending application(s), if any. 3. The Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No. 266/2018) is dismissed as not pressed in terms of the signed order. (NISHA KHULBEY) (NAND KISHOR) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH) (signed order is placed on the file)
ITEM NO.49 COURT NO.14 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7707/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2017 in CWP No. 3310/2016 passed by the High Court Of Himachal Pradesh At Shimla) VIJAYLAKSHMI Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 (X) (IA No. 46796/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 07-08-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ravi Sagar, Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Tavleen Singh, Adv. Mr. Vallabhi Shukla, Adv. Mr. Joginder Mann, Adv. Mr. Divyansh Thakur, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR Mr. Anil Nag, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the court made the following O R D E R In view of the letter circulated by learned counsel for the petitioner, list after four weeks on a non-miscellaneous day. (Geeta Ahuja) (Nand Kishor) Assistant Registrar-cum-PS Court Master(NSH)
ITEM NO.28 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7707/2018 VIJAYLAKSHMI Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 28-02-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Dr. M.P. Raju,Adv. Mr. Ginesh P.,Adv. Mr. Paul John Edison,Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Mahajan,Adv. Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR Mr. Anil Kumar,Adv. Mr. Aakash Varma,Adv. Mr. Balraj Dewan, AOR Mr. B.K. Sinha,Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Gupta,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have already filed the counter affidavit. Four weeks’ time, as a last chance is given to respondent No.3 to file the counter affidavit. After expiry of four weeks, the matter be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar MG
ITEM NO.42 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7707/2018 VIJAYLAKSHMI Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 (X) Date : 15-01-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Dr.M.P.Raju,Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr.Vikas Mahajan,Adv. Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR Dr.B.K.Sinha,Adv. Mr. Balraj Dewan, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No.7707/2018 Four weeks’ time, as a last chance, is given to respondent Nos.1 & 2 to file counter affidavit. Respondent No.3 is granted four weeks’ time, to file counter affidavit. List the matter again on 28.02.2019. ……..2
ITEM NO.42 -2- W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 All the respondents have failed to file the counter affidavit despite repeated opportunities. Hence, list the matter before the Hon’ble Court as per rules. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar SB
ITEM NO.98 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7707/2018 VIJAYLAKSHMI Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 (X) Date : 12-11-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Dr.M.P. Raju,Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR Mr. Balraj Dewan, AOR Dr.M.P. Raju,Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR Mr.Vikas Mahajan,AAG UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No. 7707/2018 Service is complete qua respondent Nos.1 & 3 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf and service is not complete in respect of respondent No.2. However, Mr.Vikas Mahajan,AAG on behalf of Mr.Vinod Sharma,AOR, undertakes to appear for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. He seeks and is given two weeks’ time to file vakalatnama and four weeks’ time to file counter affidavit. ………..2
ITEM NO.98 -2- W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 Four weeks’ time, as a last chance, is given to all respondents to file counter affidavit. List the matter again on 15.01.2019. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar SB
ITEM NO.69 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. MANOJ JAIN Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7707/2018 VIJAYLAKSHMI Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 (X) Date : 12-09-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Dr.M.P.Raju,Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr.Vikas Mahajan,Adv. Mr.Anil Kumar,Adv. Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR Dr.B.K.Sinha,Adv. Mr.Balraj Dewan,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No. 7707/2018 Service is complete qua respondent No.1 but no one has entered appearance on his behalf. However, Mr.Anil Kumar on behalf of Mr.Vinod Sharma, Ld.counsel undertakes to appear for the respondent Nos.1 & 2. He seeks and is given four weeks’ time to file vakalatnama and counter affidavit. Mr.Balraj Dewan, Ld.counsel undertakes to appear for the respondent No.3. He submits that vakalatnama has already been filed. Four weeks’ time is given to file counter affidavit. …..2
ITEM NO.69 -2- W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 Respondent Nos.1 & 2 are granted four weeks’ time, to file counter affidavit. Service is incomplete qua respondent No.3. However, Mr.Balraj Dewan, Ld.counsel undertakes to appear for the respondent No.3. He submits that vakalatnama has already been filed. Four weeks’ time is given to file counter affidavit. List the matter again on 12.11.2018. MANOJ JAIN Registrar SB
ITEM NO.70 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7707/2018 VIJAYLAKSHMI Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 (X) Date : 26-07-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR Mr. Ginesh P.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Mahajan,Adv. Mr. Vinod Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In both the matters numbered above, s ervice of notice is complete on the respondent No.1 but no one has entered appearance on his behalf. However, Mr. Vinod Sharma, Ld. Advocate has appeared on behalf of the respondent No.1. He seeks and is given two weeks time to file the vakalatnama and four weeks time to file the counter affidavit. Await the return of the service of notice already issued to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. List again on 12.9.2018. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar MG
ITEM NO.35 COURT NO.11 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7707/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2017 in CWP No. 3310/2016 passed by the High Court Of Himachal Pradesh At Shimla) VIJAYLAKSHMI Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.41582/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) WITH W.P.(C) No. 266/2018 (X) Date : 14-05-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE For Petitioner(s) Mr. Nagendra Rai, Sr. adv. Dr. M.P. Raju, Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Application seeking exemption from filing Official Translation is allowed. Issue notice. (R. NATARAJAN) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.19+57 COURT NO.8 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Item NO.19 Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.7707/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-11-2017 in CWP No. 3310/2016 passed by the High Court Of Himachal Pradesh At Shimla) VIJAYLAKSHMI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.41582/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Item NO.57 WP (C) No.266/2018 IA NO.46796/2018- EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Date : 06-04-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE For Petitioner(s) Dr. M.P. Raju, Adv. Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R A letter has been circulated by learned counsel for the petitioner seeking four weeks' adjournment. Time prayed for is granted. List this matter after four weeks. (ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (CHANDER BALA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER