# 11S.C.R,271 CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR FCI AND ORS v. JAGDISH BALARAM BAHIRA AND ORS - **Citation:** [2017] 11 S.C.R. 271 - **Court:** Supreme Court of India - **Decided:** 2017 - **Case number:** Civil Appeal No. 8928 of2015 - **Bench:** Jagdish Singh Khehar, N. v. RAMANA, Dr. D. Y. Chandra Ci-Iud - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/11s-c-r-271-chairman-and-managing-director-fci-and-ors-v-jagdish-balaram-bahira-31572 - **Pages:** 92 ## Headnote ... Constitution of India - Art. 142 - Public employment - Reservation for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe - Individuals C seeking benefit of public employment on the basis of scheduled caste/scheduled tribe claim - Verification by scrutiny committee - Invalidation of their caste or tribe claim - Protection by the constitutional court - Entitlement to - Held: Where benefit is see11red by an individual such as an appointment to a post or admission to an educational institution 'on the basis that the candidate belongs D to a reserved category for which the benefit is reserved. invalidation of the caste or tribe claim upon verification would result in 'the appointment or admission being rendered void or non est - Withdrawal 0{ benefits secured on the basis of the false caste claim is a necessary consequence - Exception to the above is in those E cases where this Court exercises its power u!Art. 142 to render complete justice - Though the pqwer of the Supreme Court u/Art. 142 is a constitutional power vested in the court for rendering complete justice and is couched in wide terms, the exercise of the jurisdiction must have due regard to legislative mandate, where a law such as Maharashtra Act XXlll of 2001 holds the field - Power u!Art. 142 should not be exercised to defeat the legislative prescription - Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification) Caste Certificate Act, 2000. F G Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Categ01:v (Regulation of Issuance and Verification) Caste Certificate .tjct, 2000 - Object and purpose of the enactment -Held: By Maharashtra Act XXlll of 2001 there is H 271 272 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017) l l S.C.R. a legislative codiflcarion of the hroad principles enunciated in **Madhuri Patil - Legislation provides a stall/tat:v .framework tu regulate issuance of casre certijicaie and to deal i.vith instances where persons did nut belong to schedule caste or tribes ur reserved categories lvere .v.eeking apfJointnzent or adn1issio11.5 to the detrilnent of genuine candidates - Basic purpose and rationale for 1he legislation is to secure the just entitlements of legitimate claimants. ss. I 0 and 11 - Individuals seeking benefit of public employment on the ba:>is of" scheduled caste/scheduled tribe claim - Invalidation of caste or lribe claim - Withdrmval of /Jene(t1 obtained - Requirement of dishonest in1ent for the application s. JO - Held: There is no requirement of" dishonest intent- Mens rea is an ingrediell/ of the penal provisions contained in s.ll ll'hich is prospective and would apply in those silllotions where the act constituting the offence has token place a/ter the date of its enforcement. Operation of the Act - Prospective or retrospective Application to admissions or appointments made prior to the date on which the Act came inlO fol"ce - Elucidated. Circulars/Government Orders/Notifications - Administrative circulars and government resolutions - Effect of - Held: Administrative circ11/ars and government resolutions are s11bservient to legislative mandate and cannot be contrwy eirher to constitutional norms or statutory principles - Where ca11didate has obtai11ed an appointment to a post 011 the basis of a caste certificate and ii is fo1111d 11po11 verification by the Scr111i11y Committee that rhe claim is false. the services of such an individual cannot be proiected hy taking recourse to adn1i11istrative circulars or resolutions -Protection uj· clai111s uj· a usurper is an ctct <~f deviance to the conslitutiunal schen1e as J-vell cfs to statuto1:v n1andate. In the batch of cases, Individuals sought the benefit of public employment on the basis of a claim to belong to a beneficiary group. On investigation it was found to be invalid. ## Text _Characters 0–39,879 of 220,987. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39879 for what follows._ (2017] 11S.C.R,271 CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR FCI AND ORS. A v. JAGDISH BALARAM BAHIRA AND ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 8928 of2015) JULY06,2017 B [JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, (:j1, N. v. RAMANA AND DR. D. Y. CHANDRA CI-IUD, JJ.] ... Constitution of India - Art. 142 - Public employment - Reservation for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe - Individuals C seeking benefit of public employment on the basis of scheduled caste/scheduled tribe claim - Verification by scrutiny committee - Invalidation of their caste or tribe claim - Protection by the constitutional court - Entitlement to - Held: Where benefit is see11red by an individual such as an appointment to a post or admission to an educational institution 'on the basis that the candidate belongs D to a reserved category for which the benefit is reserved. invalidation of the caste or tribe claim upon verification would result in 'the appointment or admission being rendered void or non est - Withdrawal 0{ benefits secured on the basis of the false caste claim is a necessary consequence - Exception to the above is in those E cases where this Court exercises its power u!Art. 142 to render complete justice - Though the pqwer of the Supreme Court u/Art. 142 is a constitutional power vested in the court for rendering complete justice and is couched in wide terms, the exercise of the jurisdiction must have due regard to legislative mandate, where a law such as Maharashtra Act XXlll of 2001 holds the field - Power u!Art. 142 should not be exercised to defeat the legislative prescription - Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification) Caste Certificate Act, 2000. F G Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Categ01:v (Regulation of Issuance and Verification) Caste Certificate .tjct, 2000 - Object and purpose of the enactment -Held: By Maharashtra Act XXlll of 2001 there is H 271 272 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017) l l S.C.R. a legislative codiflcarion of the hroad principles enunciated in **Madhuri Patil - Legislation provides a stall/tat:v .framework tu regulate issuance of casre certijicaie and to deal i.vith instances where persons did nut belong to schedule caste or tribes ur reserved categories lvere .v.eeking apfJointnzent or adn1issio11.5 to the detrilnent of genuine candidates - Basic purpose and rationale for 1he legislation is to secure the just entitlements of legitimate claimants. ss. I 0 and 11 - Individuals seeking benefit of public employment on the ba:>is of" scheduled caste/scheduled tribe claim - Invalidation of caste or lribe claim - Withdrmval of /Jene(t1 obtained - Requirement of dishonest in1ent for the application s. JO - Held: There is no requirement of" dishonest intent- Mens rea is an ingrediell/ of the penal provisions contained in s.ll ll'hich is prospective and would apply in those silllotions where the act constituting the offence has token place a/ter the date of its enforcement. Operation of the Act - Prospective or retrospective Application to admissions or appointments made prior to the date on which the Act came inlO fol"ce - Elucidated. Circulars/Government Orders/Notifications - Administrative circulars and government resolutions - Effect of - Held: Administrative circ11/ars and government resolutions are s11bservient to legislative mandate and cannot be contrwy eirher to constitutional norms or statutory principles - Where ca11didate has obtai11ed an appointment to a post 011 the basis of a caste certificate and ii is fo1111d 11po11 verification by the Scr111i11y Committee that rhe claim is false. the services of such an individual cannot be proiected hy taking recourse to adn1i11istrative circulars or resolutions -Protection uj· clai111s uj· a usurper is an ctct <~f deviance to the conslitutiunal schen1e as J-vell cfs to statuto1:v n1andate. In the batch of cases, Individuals sought the benefit of public employment on the basis of a claim to belong to a beneficiary group. On investigation it was found to be invalid. Notwithstanding the invalidation of the claim to belong to a Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe or backward community, this Court's jurisdiction is invoked. Issue which arises as to whether such equities are sustainable at law and, if so, the limits that define the jurisdiction CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR FCI v. JAGD!SH 273 BALARAM BAHIRA of the court to protect individuals who have secured access to A the benefit of reservation inspite of the fact that they do not belong to the caste, tribe or class for whom reservation is intended. Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: l. It is declared that (i) The directions which were issued by the Constitution Bench of this Court in *Mi/ind case were in pursuance of the powers vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution; (ii) Since the decision of this Court in ** Madlzuri Patil which was rendered on 2.09.1994, the regime which held the field in pursuance of those directions envisaged a detailed procedure for issuance of caste certificates, scrutiny and verification of caste and tribe claims by Scrutiny Committees to be constituted by the State Government, the procedure for the conduct of investigation into the authenticity of the claim, cancellation and confiscation of the caste certificate where the claim is found to be false or not genuine, withdrawal of benefits in terms of the termination of an appointment, cancellation of an admission to an educational institution or disqualification from an electoral office obtained on the basis that the candidate belongs to a reserved category; and prosecution for a criminal offence; (iii) The decisions of this Court in ***R. Vishwanat/za Pillai and in ****Datt(l/ray rendered by benches of three Judges laid down the principle of law that where a benefit is secured by an individual-such as an appointment to a post or admission to an educational institution-on the basis that the candidate belongs to a reserved category for which the benefit is reserved, the invalidation of the caste or tribe claim upon verification would result in the appointment or, as the case may be, the admission being rendered void or 11011 est; (iv) The exception to the above doctrine was in those cases where this Court exercised its powe'r under Article 142 of the Constitution to render complete justice; (v) By Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001 there is a legislative codification of the broad principles enunciated in** Madl111ri Patil, the legislation provides a statutory framework for regulating the B c D E F G H 274 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2017] It S.C.R A issuance of cast11 certificates (Section 4); constitution of Scrutiny Committees for verification of claims (Section 6); submission of applications for :verification of caste certificates (Section 6(2) and 6(3); canceJlatiou o.f .;a,te certifi~ates. (Section 7); burden of proof {Scftio~ 8); ~thdraw~f.oftibticftts:o& .. incd upon the invalidation B c D E F G H of the claim (Section lO); and initiation of prosecution (Section 11), amongst other things; (vi) The power conferred by Section 7 upon the Scrutiny Committee to verify a claim is both in respect of caste certificates issued prior to and subsequent to the enforcement of the Act on 18.10.2001, finality does not attach to a caste certificate (or to the claim to receive benefits) where the claim of the individual to belong to a reserved caste, tribe or class is yet to be verified by the Scrutiny Committee; (vii) Withdrawal of benefits secured on the basis of a caste claim which has been fouud to be false and is invalidated is a necessary consequence which flows from the invalidation of the caste claim and uo issue of retrospcctivity would arise; (viii) The decisions in Kavita Solu11ke a11d Sliali11i of two Judges arc overruled, Sliali11i in so far as it stipulates a requirement of a dishonest intent for the application of the provision of Scction 10 is, with respect, erroneous and does not reflect the correct position in law; (ix) Me11s rea is an ingredient of the penal provisions contained in Sqction 11 which is prospective and would apply in those situations where the act constituting the offence has taken place after the date of its enforcement; (x) The judgment of the Full Bench of the Bombay High Court in Aru11 So11011e is manifestly erroneous and is overruled; and (xi) Though the power of the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution is a constitutional power vested in the court for rendering complete justice and is a power which is couched in wide terms, the exercise of the jurisdiction must have due regard to legislative mandate, where a law such as Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001 holds the field. [Para 57][346-BH; 347-A-.FJ CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR FCI v. JAGDISH 275 BALARAM BAHIRA *State af Maharashtra v. Mi/ind (2001) I SCC 4 : A [2000] 5 Suppl. SCR 65 - explained and followed. **Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development (1994) 6 SCC 241; R. Vishwanatha Pillai v. State of Kera/a (2004) 2 SCC 105 : [2004] l SCR 360; Union of India v. Dattatray S/o. Namdeo B Mendhekar (2008) 4 SCC 612 : [2008] 2 SCR 1096 - relied on. Kavita Vasant Solunke v. State of Maharashtra (2012) 8 SCC 430 : [2012] 7 SCR 251; Shalini Gajananrao Dalal v. New English High School Association (2013) C 16 SCC 526 : [2013] 12 SCR 807 - overruled. Arun Vishwanath Sonone v. State of Maharashtra (2015) l Mb L.J. 457 - disapproved. 2.1 The Constitution Bench of this Court which decided *Mi/ind case was. on a reference whether it is permissible to hold D an enquiry and let in evidence to decide or declare that any tribe or tribal community. or. a part or group within the tribe or community is included in t.he general name, even though it is not so specifically mentioned in the entry contained in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. The Constitution Bench held E that it was not permissible either to hold an enquiry or to allow evidence to decide that though a tribe (or its sub group) is not specifically included in the Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950 it must, nonetheless, be treated or deemed to be included in the general name. The view of this Court is that an entry in the Order has to be read as .it stands. However, the Constitution Bench, having F due regard to the circumstances of the individual cases before ' the Court, protected the degree obtained by the candidate concerned. This Court also provided that having regard to the passage of time including interim orders which were passed, the admissions and appointments that have become final would G remain unaffected by the judgment. [Para 40][332-D-G] *State of Maharashtra .v. Mi/ind (2001) 1 SCC 4 : [2000) 5 Suppl. SCR 65 - explained and followed. H 276 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] l l S.C.R. 2.2 The object and purpose underlying the enactment of the state legislation is to regulate the issuance of caste certificates and to deal with instances which had come to light where persons who did not belong to the Scheduled Castes or Tribes or reserved categories were seeking appointments or admissions to the detriment of genuine candidates. The basic purpose and rationale for the legislation is to secure the just entitlements of legitimate claimants. The judgment in Slia/i11i case is with respect to error in imputing the requirement of a dishonest intent into the provisions of Section I 0 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000. Sections 7 and 10 have to be construed in harmony. Section 7 provides for the cancellation of a caste certificate where before or after commencement of the Act, a person who docs not belong to a reserved calegory has obtained a false caste certificate and the Scrutiny Committee, after enquiry, is of the opinion that the certificate was obtained fraudulently. These requirements have to be fulfilled before the certificate is cancelled. The falsity of the caste certificate and the opinion of the Scrutiny Committee of its being fraudulently obtained form the basis of a cancellation under Section 7. Section 10 prescribes that a person who docs not belong to a reserved category and secures admission or obtains appointment against a reserved post by producing a false caste certificate shall upon its cancellation by the Scrutiny Committee be debarred from the institution or as the case may be discharged from employment and the benefits derived shall be withdrawn. Sub-section (2) provided for the recovery of all financial benetits while sub-section (3) provides for the cancellation of a degree, diploma or educational qualification. Sub-section (4) provides for disqualification from electoral office. The falsity of the certificate is the basis of an order under Section 7. Section IO provides the consequence. The challenge to an order of the Scrutiny Committee (invalidating a caste or tribe certificate) may fail or succeeds. If the challenge before the High Court succeeds, no question of the consequence under Section 10 arises. If the challenge fails, the consequence under Section 10 follows the finding in the order under Section 7 that the certificate is false. CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR FCI v. JAGDISH BALARAM BAHIRA Similarly, if the order under Section 7 is not challenged. or if the challenge is given up, there is no occasion to protect the benefits secured on the basis of a certificate which is invalidated. The expression "false" must be construed in contra-distinction to that which is true, genuine or authentic. Falsity in this sense means the setting up of a claim to belong to a reserved category. (Para 44)(335-G-H; 336-A-F] 2.3 Section 10 provides for the withdrawal of civil benefits which have accrued to an individual on the strength of a claim to belong to a reserved category, when the claim upon due enquiry and verification is invalidated. Section 10, as its marginal note indicates, provides for the withdrawal of benefits secured on the basis of a false caste certificate. Section 11 provides for offences and penalties. The invalidation of a caste certificate may result in two consequences : (i) immediate cancellation or withdrawal of the benefits received by the candidate on the hasis of a false caste certificate; (ii) prosecution of a claimant who procures a certificate which is found to be false· by the Scrutiny Committee. The intent of a candidate may be of relevance only if there is a prosecution for a criminal offence. However, where a civil consequence of withdrawing the benefits which have accrued on the basis of a false caste claim is in issue, it would be contrary to the legislative intent to import the requirement of a dishonest intent. In importing such a requirement, the bench of two Judges in Sllali11i's case has fallen into error. In the very nature of things it would be casting an impossible burden to deh·e into the mental processes of an applicant for a caste certificate. As the provisions of the Act indicate, a person, who claims to belong to a reserved category and who seeks the benefit of an appointment to a reserved post or of admission to an educational institution against a reserved scat or any other benefit provided by the provisions of Article 15(4), has ,to apply for the grant of a caste certificate. The burden of proof that he or she belongs to such a caste, tribe or class lies with the claimant. The legislature has legitimately assumed that a person who seeks a caste certificate must surely be aware of the caste, tribe or class to which he or she belongs and must establish the claim. If the claim to belong to the reserved category is found to be untrue, the caste certificate has to be cancelled on the ground that it has been obtained falsely. The 277 A B c D E F G H 278 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2017] 11 S.C.R. grant of the benefit to the candidate is fraudulent because the candidate has obtained a benefit reserved exclusively for a specified caste, tribe or class to which he or she is not entitled. The decision in Shalini's case would result in serious consequences and would eviscerate the statutory provision. The interpretation placed on the provisions of Section 10 by the judgment in Shalini's case is evidently incorrect. (Para 45)(336G-H; 337-A-B] 2.4 Service under the Union and the States, or for that matter under the instrumentalities of the State subscrvcs a public purpose. These services arc instruments of governance. Where the State embarks upon public employment, it is under the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 to follow the principle of equal opportunity. Affirmative action in the Constitution is part of the quest for substantive equality. Available resources and the opportunities provided in the form of public employment are in contemporary times short of demands and needs. Hence, the procedure for selection, and the prescription of eligibility criteria has a significant public clement in enabling the State to make a choice amongst competing claims. The selection of ineligible persons is a manifestation of a. systemic failure and has a deleterious effect on good governance. Selection of a person who is not eligible allows someone who is ineligible to gain access to scarce public resources. The rights of eligible persons arc viola led since a person who is not eligible for the post is selected. An illegality is perpetrated by bestowing benefits upon an imposter undcservingly. These effects upon good governance find a similar echo when a person who docs not belong to a reserved category passes of as a member of that category and obtains admission to an educational institution. Those for whom the Constitution has made special provisions arc as a result ousted when an imposter who docs not belong to a reserved category is selected. The fraud on the Constitution precisely lies in this. Such a consequence must be avoided and stringent steps be taken by the Court to ensure that unjust claims of imposters are not protected in the exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 142. The nation cannot live on a lie. Courts play a vital institutional role in preserving the rule of law. The judicial process should not be allowed to be I• • ••. . . CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR FCI v. JAGDISH BALARAM BAHIRA utilised to protect the unscrupulous and to preserve the benefits which have accrued to an imposter on the specious pica of equity. Once the legislature has stepped in, by enacting Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001, the power under Article 142 should not be exercised to defeat legislative prescription. The Constitution Bench in Mili11d's case spoke on 28 November 2000. The state law has been enforced from 18 October 2001. Judicial directions must be consistent with law. Several decisions failed to take note 279 A B of Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001. The directions which were issued under Article 142 were on the erroneous inarticulate premise that the area was unregulated by statute. Shali11i case noted the statute but misconstrued it. [Para 46][337-F-H; 338C A-E] 2.5 It cannot be said that Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001 cannot apply to admissions or appointments which were made prior to the date on which the Act came into force. The submission based on retrospectivity overlooks certain crucial links in the D analysis. It is a cardinal principle of construction that every statute is prinra facie prospective unless it is expressly or by necessary implication made to have a retrospective operation. However, the rule in general is applicable where the object of the statute is to affect vested rights or to impose new burdens or to impair existing obligations. Equally the rule against retrospective construction is not applicable to a statute merely because a part of the requisites for its action is drawn from a time antecedent to its passing. Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001 provides in Section 1 (2) that it shall come into force on such dates as the State Government may, by notification in the official gazette, appoint upon receiving assent of the President. The Act was notified to come into force by a government notification dated 17 October 2001 with effect from 18 October 2001. Prior to the enforcement '-Of the Act, the regime which held the field was in terms of the directions _that were issued by this Court in its judgment dated 2 September 1994 in Madlrm·i Patil's case. The directions which ' were issued by this Court comprehended: passing of an order of ' cailc'ellation' and confrsc~tion ~ .. th\! caste certificate if the' claim W:JS found to be_false; and,cancellation of the admission g~antcd' or the appointment made where the caste certiticate is invalidated E F G H 280 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] ll S.C.R. and debarment of the candidate from further studies or to continue in a post. [Para 501[340-E-H; 341-E-F) 2.6 The regime which obtained since 2',. September I 994 under the directions in Mudhuri Patil was granted a statutory status by the enactment of Maharashtra Act XXIII of2001. Section 7 provides for the cancellation and confiscation of a false caste certificate whether it was issued before or after the commencement of the Act. The expression "before or after the commencement of this Act'' indicates that the Scrutiny Committee constituted under Section 6 is empowered to cancel a caste certificate whether it was issued prior to 18 October 2001 or thereafter. SectiQn 10 which provides for the withdrawal of benefits secured on the basis of a false caste certificate which is withdrawn is essentially a con seq nence of the cancellation of the caste certificate. Where a candidatr has secured admission to an educational institution on the basis that he or she belongs to a designated reserved category and it is found upon investigation that the daim to belong to that category is false, admission to the institution necessarily falls with the invalidation of the caste certificate. Admission being founded on a claim to belong to a specified caste, tribe or class, it is rendered void upon the claim being found to he untrue. The same must hold in the case of an appointment to a post. Therefore, the absence of the words "before or after the commencement of this Act" in Section 10 makes no substantive difference because a withdrawal of benefit is an event which flows naturally and as a plain consequence of the invalidation of the claim. Moreover, even prior to the enactment of the state legislation, the benefit which was secured on the basis of a caste claim was liable to be withdrawn upon its invalidation. The Act has hence, neither affected vested rights nor has it imposed new burdens. The Act does not impair existing obligations in Sections 7 and IO. An analysis of the provisions of Section 11 demonstrates that the provision creates offences and provides for penalties. Under Section ll (l) (a) the offence consists of obtaining a false caste certificate (by furnishing false information), filing a false statement or document or by any fraudulent means. Under Section II (1)(b) the offence consists in securing a benefit exclusively reserved for designated castes, CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR FCl v. JAGDISH BALARAM BAHIRA tribes or classes by a person who docs not belong to that category in terms of appointment; admission in an educational institution against a reserved scat; or election to a local authority or cooperative society against an office which is reserved for that category. The provisions of Section 11 (I) must be read and construed in a prospective sense having regard to the guarantee contained in Article 20 (I) of the Constitution. The offence having been created by Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001, the Act which constitutes the offence must relate to a period aner the date of the enforcement of the Act. In terms of the penal provisions of Section 11, the statute in so far as it creates offences and provides for penalties must hence be construed prospecth'cly. [Paras 51, 52][341-.F-H; 342-A-H] 2. 7 Administrative circulars and government resolutions arc subservient to legislative mandate and cannot be contrary either to constitutional norms or statutory principles. Where a candidate has obtained an appointment to a post on the solemn basis that he or she belongs to a designated caste, tribe or class for whom the post is meant and it is found upon verification by the Scrutiny Committee that the claim is false, the services of such an individual cannot be protected by taking recourse to administrative circulars or resolutions. Protection of claims of a usurper is an act of deviance to the constitutional scheme as well as to statutory mandate. No government resolution or circular can override constitutional or statutory norms. The principle that government is bound by its own circulars is well-settled but it cannot apply in a situation such as present. Protecting the services of a candidate who is found not to belong to the community or tribe for whom the reservation is intended substantially encroaches upon legal rights of genuine members of the reserved communities whose just entitlements arc negated by the grant of a scat to an ineligible person. In such a situation where the rights of genuine members of reserved groups or communities arc liable to be affected detrimentally, government circulars or resolutions cannot operate to their detriment. [Para 53][343-A-D] 2.8 When an admission to an educational institution is sought to be cancelled upon the invalidation of a caste or tribe claim is that the student has substantially progressed in the course 281 A B c D E F G H 282 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] l l S.C.R. of studies and a cancellation of admission would result in prejudice not only to the student but to the system as well. When the student has completed the degree or diploma, a submission against its withdrawal is urged a fortiorari. The state legislature has made a statutory decisiuji Ed11calion Socie(1• & Anr. v. Slt1te of M11/wras/1trt1 & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.8601/17 @ SLP (C) No. 289 of 2016) the High Court by its order has none the less directed reinstatement of the third respondent subjl•ct to an undertaking CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR FCI v. JAGDISH 285 BALARAM BAHIRA that he would not claim the benefit of belonging to the Scheduled A Tribe in future. Once the tribe claim of the respondent has been held to be false, the judgment of the High Court is unsustainable for the reasons indicated in the body of this judgment. The judgment and order of the High Court is set aside. (Para 58)354D, F-G] 3.9 In Hi11dusta11 Aero11autics Limited v. Murlidltar Arju11 Neware t111dA11r. (C.A. Nos. 8602-03/17 @ SLP (C) Nos.529-30 of 2016) for the reasons contained in the body of the judgment· and having due regard to the fact that the claim of the respondent B has been found to be false, there is merit in the appeals by the appellant. The impugned judgments of the High Court arc set C aside. [Para 58](355-A, D] 3.10 In India Trade Promotio11 Organisation v. Vivekkumar Lajjaslta11kar Cltaurasiya (C.A.No.8607/17 @ SLP ©No.14830 of 2015) and in Mumbai Metropolitan Regio11 Develop111e11t Authority v. Raje11dra Ramc/1a11dra Dltakale & A11r. (C.A. 8609/17 @ SLP D (C) No.13409 of 2015) for the reasons contained in the body of the judgment, the impugned judgment of the High Court granting reinstatement to the respondent, is set aside. [Para 58][355-FG; 356-A) 3.11 In State of Maharashtra v. Vasant, s/o.Gyandeo Gonnade E (C.A. 8606/17 @ S.L.P.(C)No. 19992 of 2015) in view of the reasons contained in the body of this judgment, the basis of the impugned decision of the High Court-.Full Bench decision in Arun Sonone, is erroneous. The respondent docs not belong to the Halba Scheduled Tribe. It is also clear that the benefits obtained F by the respondent were subject to the decision in Milind, wherein this Court has held that Halba-Koshti is not a Scheduled Tribe, the relevant entry in the Scheduled Tribes Order 1950 being 'Halba, Halbi'. The impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside. (Para 58][356-E; 358-B-CJ 3.12 In State ofMaharasltlra v. Ku. Vijaya Deorao Nandunwar & A11r. (C.A.No.9107 of 2015), in Prttdip Gajam111 Koli Vs.State of Maltarttslttra & Ors.(Civil Appeal No.8598/17 @ SLP (C) 18925 of 2014 for the reasons contained in the body of the judgment, the impugned order of the High Court is unsustainable and is set G H 286 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] l l S.C.R. A aside. [Para 5811358-D, FJ 3.13 In /Shll!ar Shrawan Nikhare Vs.Stale of Maharashtra & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 7187 of 2013) having regard to the fact that the claim of the appellant to belong to a Scheduled Tribe was invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee, the School Tribunal cannot B be faulted in declining to entertain the appeal against the consequential order of termination of service. Moreover, for the reasons containe