What is the appeal against?
The judgment pertains to a civil appeal by the Union of India against a judgment from the High Court of Patna. The case involves Rohit Nandan, who was originally appointed as a Postal Assistant under the Other Backward Caste (OBC) category based on his ‘Tanti’ caste certificate. Following a notification from the State Government that deleted ‘Tanti’ from the OBC list, Nandan obtained a Scheduled Caste certificate and sought to change his category in service records.
The main issue in this appeal
The main issue in this appeal was whether the State Government had the authority to alter the lists of Scheduled Castes published under Article 341 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court found that the State Government’s notification merging the Tanti caste with the Scheduled Caste list was illegal and unsustainable, as only Parliament has the power to make such changes. Consequently, the respondent, who was initially appointed under the OBC category, could not claim benefits as a Scheduled Caste member.
High court decision
The High Court of Patna had ruled in favor of Rohit Nandan, allowing his claim under the Scheduled Caste category based on the State Government’s notification. The outcome of the High Court’s ruling regarding Rohit Nandan’s case was that the High Court allowed his writ petition, which challenged the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal that had dismissed his Original Application. The High Court’s decision favored Rohit Nandan, permitting him to claim benefits under the Scheduled Caste category.
Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision
The Court found that the State Government’s notification merging the Tanti caste with the Scheduled Caste list was illegal and unsustainable, as it lacked the authority to alter the lists of Scheduled Castes published under Article 341 of the Constitution. His promotion through a competitive examination was initially successful but later put on hold due to the Department’s determination that he did not qualify for Scheduled Caste benefits. This led to the dismissal of his application at the Central Administrative Tribunal, which was overturned by the High Court. The Court emphasized that any changes to the Scheduled Castes list must be made by Parliament, not by state notifications.
Main points
14. The respondent was in service of the Union on the basis of reservation claimed by him as an OBC candidate. It was only on 02.07.2015 that the State Government issued a notification shifting the caste Tanti from the OBC to that of Scheduled Caste and the necessary change in the service record was brought only on 17.08.2018. In the meanwhile, an advertisement was issued on 07.10.2016 for a Limited Departmental Competitive Examination, and the respondent applied as a Scheduled Caste candidate.
15. When the Government refused appointment to the respondent to the post as he does not belong to Scheduled Caste, he approached the Tribunal and filed an Original Application which came to be dismissed on 01.04.2022. However, the respondent’s writ petition was allowed by the High Court only on 19.01.2023. We are informed that during the pendency of the matter before this Court, the respondent was appointed to the said promotional post only on 14.12.2023. Even assuming that the respondent was given benefit of his illegal categorisation as a Scheduled Caste candidate, the benefit that accrued him was for a short period of less than a year and that too during the pendency of this appeal. Therefore, there are no equities in favour of the respondent like that of the candidates in the case of Bhim Rao Ambedkar or K. Nirmala (supra). In view of the clear position of law, coupled with lack of equities based on the facts and circumstances of the case, we cannot direct continuation of the respondent on the basis of the illegal certification as Scheduled Caste.
16. In view of the above, we allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the High Court in CWJC No. 12096 of 2022 dated 19.01.2023 and restore the judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 01.04.2022 dismissing the Original Application filed by the respondent. There shall be no order as to costs.
Party
Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rohit Nandan, Civil Appeal No(s). 14394 of 2024 (@ SLP (C) No. 18985 of 2023), Date: December 13, 2024
