The Division Bench, comprising Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra, held that the respondent would remain an Other Backward Class (OBC) candidate and not be recognized as SC as per the Bihar Government’s notification dated July 2, 2015.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court upheld the decision to reject a Tanti candidate’s claim under the Scheduled Caste (SC) category, reaffirming that the merger of the Tanti caste with the SC list is invalid.
Relying on its judgment in Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Vichar Manch Bihar v. State of Bihar, 2024 INSC 528, the Court allowed the appeal by the Union of India, challenging the Patna High Court’s Division Bench ruling in favor of the respondent.
The Division Bench, comprising Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra, held that the respondent would remain an Other Backward Class (OBC) candidate and not be recognized as SC as per the Bihar Government’s notification dated July 2, 2015.
Additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj represented the appellants, while Advocate Anilendra Pandey represented the respondent.
The respondent, originally appointed as a Postal Assistant in 1997 under the OBC category based on his Tanti caste certificate, sought a change in his service record to the SC category following a 2015 state government notification.
This notification merged the Tanti caste with the SC list by integrating it with the Pan/Swasi caste.
The respondent obtained an SC certificate and applied for promotion to Postal Service Group ‘B’ through a Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE). Despite passing the examination, his promotion was withheld on the grounds that he did not qualify as an SC candidate, leading to the litigation.
The Central Administrative Tribunal initially dismissed the respondent’s application. During the appeal, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar case declared such caste mergers as illegal.
The Bench reiterated that the transfer of Tanti caste from the OBC list to the SC list was contrary to law. Consequently, the respondent was not entitled to SC benefits or promotion based on the invalid caste categorization.
Though the respondent was temporarily promoted during the appeal’s pendency, the Court noted that this benefit was short-lived and lacked equitable grounds.
The Bench restored the Tribunal’s original decision, dismissing the respondent’s application and concluding that the SC certification was unlawful.
Case Title: Union of India & Ors. v. Rohit Nandan
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
