Merger of Tanti Caste With Scheduled Caste List Bad in Law: Apex Court Upholds Disentitlement Of Candidate’s Claim Under SC Category
The Supreme Court upheld the decision of disentitling a Tanti candidate’s claim under the Scheduled Caste category and reiterated that the merger of the Tanti caste with the Scheduled Caste list is bad in law.
The Apex Court made such observations by following its recent decision in Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Vichar Manch Bihar v. State of Bihar 2024 INSC 528.
The Union of India approached the Apex Court challenging the judgment of the Division Bench of the Patna High Court allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent. The Petition was filed challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing his Original Application filed against the decision of the Government disentitling his claim under the Scheduled Caste category.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha & Justice Manoj Misra said, “Following the recent decision of this Court in Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Vichar Manch Bihar v. State of Bihar, we have allowed the appeal and directed that the respondent will continue to be of the OBC Category, belonging to Tanti caste and shall not to be treated as Scheduled Caste as per the notification of State Government dated 02.07.2015.”
Additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj represented the Appellants while Advocate Anilendra Pandey represented the Respondent.
The respondent was appointed as a Postal Assistant in the year 1997 under the Other Backward Caste (OBC) Category on the basis of his 'Tanti' Caste Certificate. In 2015, the State Government deleted 'Tanti' caste from the list of OBCs to enable members of the said community to avail benefits of Scheduled Caste (SC) category by merging it with Pan/Swasi caste which figures in the list of Scheduled Castes.
Following the gazette notification, the respondent obtained a Scheduled Caste certificate as member of the Pan/Swasi caste from the office of District Magistrate, Patna and requested for change of his category from OBC to Scheduled Caste in his Service Book in terms of the new caste certificate and the aforesaid Gazette notification. In the meanwhile, the respondent applied for promotion to the Postal Service Group ‘B’ through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE). Though he was declared successful in the examination, his name was not approved for promotion and his result was put on hold.
The respondent was not held to be entitled to the benefit of Scheduled Caste category as he didnot belong to scheduled caste and deleted his name from the list of candidates successful in the examination. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the respondent filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, which was dismissed. This is how the litigation ensued.
The Bench noted that an important development occurred during the pendency of the appeal. The very same question was taken up and decided by this Court on July 15, 2024 in Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar (supra) and it was held that the exercise of taking out ‘Tanti’ from the EBC (‘Extremely Backward Classes’) list issued under the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (For Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1991 and its merger with the Scheduled Caste list is bad, illegal and unsustainable.
The Bench further observed, “While the present case deals with the removal of the Tanti caste from the OBC list instead of the EBC List, the decision of this Court in Bhim Rao Ambedkar (supra) covers the issue and the notification of the State Government adding to the list of Scheduled Class is illegal and unlawful. The respondent cannot claim the benefits of the Scheduled Caste Category since the merger of the Tanti caste with the Scheduled Caste list is bad in law in light of Bhim Rao Ambedkar (supra).”
The Bench was of the view that after the decision of this Court in the case of Bhim Rao Ambedkar (supra), the issue of the appellant claiming reservation as Scheduled Caste candidate does not subsist.
The Apex Court was also apprised of the fact that during the pendency of the matter before this Court, the respondent was appointed to the said promotional post. Even assuming that the respondent was given benefit of his illegal categorisation as a Scheduled Caste candidate, the Bench held that the benefit that accrued to him was for a short period of less than a year and that too during the pendency of this appeal. Therefore, there were no equities in favour of the respondent like that of the candidates in the case of Bhim Rao Ambedkar(supra).
In view of the clear position of law coupled with lack of equities, the Bench refused to direct continuation of the respondent on the basis of the illegal certification as Scheduled Caste.
Thus, allowing the appeal, the Bench restored the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing the Original Application filed by the respondent.
Cause Title: Union of India & Ors. v. Rohit Nandan [Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 984]
Appearance:
Appellants: ASG K.M.Nataraj, AOR Amrish Kumar, Advocates Shradha Deshmukh, R.Bala, Aakanksha Kaul, Sarthak Karol, Rohit Khare, Piyush Beriwal
Respondents: Advocates Anilendra Pandey, Rajeev Kumar, Priya Kashyap, Nadeem Hussain, AOR M/S. Ranjan And Company
