9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1953X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essential part of the rule of law which is the basis of the administration of justice in this country - The binding character of judgments pronounced by courts of competent jurisdiction is itself an essential part of the rule of law, and the rule of law obviously is the basis of the administration of justice on which the Constitution lays so much emphasis. In Mathura Prasad v. Dossibai [ 1970 (2) TMI 139 - SUPREME COURT ], this Court held that for the application of the rule of res-judicata, the Court is not concerned with the correctness or otherwise of the earlier judgment. The matter in issue if one purely of fact decided in the earlier proceedings by a competent Court must in any subsequent litigation between the same parties be recorded as finally decided and cannot be re-opened. That is true even in regard to mixed questions of law and fact determined in the earlier proceeding between the same parties which cannot be revised or reopened in a subsequent proceeding between the same parties. The order passed by the High Court in O.P. No. 9216 of 1986 which had attained finality did not permit a fresh enquiry into the caste status of writ-Petitioner. Inasmuch as the High Court qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayaditya Banerjee, Advs. M/s. for Temple Law Firm JUDGMENT T.S. Thakur, J. 1. Leave granted in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 24775 of 2013. 2. Common questions of law arise for consideration in these appeals which shall stand disposed of by this common order. But before we formulate the questions that fall for determination the factual matrix in which the same arise need to be summarised for a proper appreciation of the controversy. 3. Respondent- V.K. Mahanudevan in Civil Appeal No. 3468 of 2007 applied to Tehsildar, Alathur in the State of Kerala for grant of a Scheduled Caste Certificate on the basis that he was a 'Thandan' which was a notified Scheduled Caste. The Tehsildar held an enquiry and found that the Appellant did not belong to the Scheduled Caste community and reported the matter to the Director, Scheduled Caste Development Department, who in turn forwarded the case to Director, Kerala Institute for Research, Training and Development Studies of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, ('KIRTADS' for short) for investigation and report. 4. Aggrieved by the denial of the certificate the Respondent filed O.P. No. 9216 of 1986 before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... crutiny Committee to be constituted by the first Respondent as per the directions we propose to issue in that regard... (Emphasis supplied) 6. Pursuant to the above directions of the High Court the caste certificate issued in favour of the Respondent also came under scrutiny. In the course of scrutiny, it was found that the reports submitted by KIRTADS and relied upon by the High Court while allowing O.P. No. 9216 of 1986 was erroneous and that the Respondent actually belonged to Ezhuva community which fell under the OBC category. Director, KIRTADS accordingly issued notice to the Respondent to appear before him for a personal hearing in support of the claim that he was a Thandan and hence a Scheduled Caste. Aggrieved by the said proceedings the Respondent filed O.P. No. 5834 of 1991 before the High Court of Kerala in which he challenged the proposed enquiry proceedings relating to his caste status primarily on the ground that the decision of this Court in Palaghat Jilla Thandan Samudhaya Samrakshna Samithi and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Anr. (1994) 1 SCC 359 had settled the controversy relating to Ezhuva/Thiyya being a 'Thandan' in the district of Palaghat. It was also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent to show cause as to why the certificate issued in his favour should not be cancelled. 9. Aggrieved by the notice issued to him the Respondent once again approached the High Court in O.P. No. 2912 of 2000 which was disposed of by the High Court by its order dated 4th July, 2001 with a direction that the KIRTADS report shall be placed before the State Government for appropriate orders. The State Government accordingly considered the matter and passed an order dated 18th January, 2003 by which it concurred with the report and the view taken by KIRTADS and declared as follow: (i) It is declared that Shri. V.K. Mahanudevan, S/o Shri Kunjukuttan, Kunnissery House, Kottaparambil, Vadakkancherry, Alathur, Palakkad District who is now working as Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Irrigation Department, Palakkad does not belong to Thandan Community which is a Sch. Caste, but belongs to Ezhava Community included in the list of Other Backward Classes (OBC). (ii) None of the members of his family shall be eligible for any of the benefits exclusively intended for members of the Sch. Castes. If any of the members of the family of Shri V.K. Mahanudevan have availed of any of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvation that the judgment in O.P. No. 9216 of 1986 had effectively settled the question regarding the caste status of the Respondent. Civil Appeals No. 3469 and 3470 of 2007 have been filed by the State against the said judgment of the High Court while Civil Appeal No. 3468 of 2007 has been filed by the members of the Irrigation Department of the Government of Kerala. Civil Appeal arising out of Petition for special leave to appeal (Civil) No. 24775 of 2013 has been filed by State against the Order dated 5th September, 2012. 12. Two distinct questions fall for determination in these appeals. The first is whether the Appellants could have reopened for examination the caste status of the Respondent- V.K. Mahanudevan no matter judgment of the High Court in O.P. No. 9216 of 1986 had declared him to be a 'Thandan' belonging to a Scheduled Caste community. The High Court has as seen above taken the view that its judgment and Order in O.P. No. 9216 of 1986 effectively settled the question regarding the caste status of Respondent which could not be reopened as the said judgment had attained finality. The second and the only other question that would arise for determination is whet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Based thereon the 5th Respondent will also make the necessary changes in the S.S.L.C. book of the Petitioner treating him as a scheduled caste and not as a D.B.C. This also will be done by the 5th Respondent within a period of one month from today. 14. A caste certificate was in the above circumstances issued in favour of the Respondent pursuant to the order passed by the High Court which order has attained finality for the same has not been challenged leave alone modified or set aside in any proceedings till date. The question in the above context is whether a fresh enquiry into the Caste Status of the Respondent could be instituted by the Government. The enquiry, as seen earlier, was initiated in the light of the certain observations made by the full bench of the Kerala High Court in Kerala Pattika Jathi Samrekshana Samithy v. State AIR 1995 Ker 337 whereby the High Court had entertained suspicion about the validity of certificates that were corrected after 27th July, 1997. That pronouncement came nearly eight years after the High Court had disposed of O.P. No. 9216 of 1986 and a resultant certificate issued in favour of the Respondent. It was in the above backdrop rightly arg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustice on which the Constitution lays so much emphasis. 16. That even erroneous decisions can operate as res-judicata is also fairly well settled by a long line of decisions rendered by this Court. In Mohanlal Goenka v. Benoy Kishna Mukherjee AIR 1953 SC 65, this Court observed: There is ample authority for the proposition that even an erroneous decision on a question of law operates as 'res judicata' between the parties to it. The correctness or otherwise of a judicial decision has no bearing upon the question whether or not it operates as 'res judicata'. 17. Similarly in State of West Bengal v. Hemant Kumar Bhattacharjee AIR 1966 SC 1061, this Court reiterated the above principles in the following words: A wrong decision by a court having jurisdiction is as much binding between the parties as a right one and may be superseded only by appeals to higher tribunals or other procedure like review which the law provides. 18. The recent decision of this Court in Kalinga Mining Corporation v. Union of India (2013) 5 SCC 252 is a timely reminder of the very same principle. The following passage in this regard is apposite: In our opinion, if the parties are allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the High Court in O.P. No. 9216 of 1986. The order it is evident from a plain reading of the same relies more upon the submissions made before it by the Government Counsel than those urged on behalf of the writ-Petitioners (Respondents herein). That there was an enquiry by KIRTADS into the caste status of the writ Petitioners (Respondents herein) which found his claim of being a Thandan justified hence entitled to a scheduled caste certificate has not been disputed. That the report of KIRTADS was accepted by the Director of Harijan Welfare, Trivandrum is also not denied. That apart, the State Government at no stage either before or after the Order passed by the Single Judge of the High Court questioned the conclusions recorded therein till the full bench in Pattika Jathi's case (supra) expressed doubts about the corrections being made in the records and certificates for the grant of scheduled caste status. That being the case, the High Court could not be said to have been misled or fraudulently misguided into passing an order, leave alone, misled by the writ-Petitioners (Respondent herein). It is only because the full bench of the Kerala High Court held that anthropological ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shown in the said part namely Boyan and Malayan which were shown as scheduled caste for specific areas of the State of Kerala, Thandan had no such geographical or regional limitation. This implied that 'Thandan' was included as a Scheduled Caste for the entire State of Kerala. 23. Consequent upon the promulgation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976, the Kerala State Government started receiving complaints alleging that a section of Ezhuva/Thiyya community of Malabar areas and certain taluk of Malabar districts who were also called 'Thandan' were taking undeserved advantage of the Scheduled Caste reservations. The complaints suggested that these two categories of Thandan were quite different and distinct from each other and that the benefit admissible to Thandans generally belonging to the Scheduled Caste community should not be allowed to be taken by those belonging to the Ezhuva/Thiyya community as they are not scheduled castes. Acting upon these reports and complaints, the State Government appears to have issued instructions to the effect that applications for issue of community certificates to 'Thandans' of all the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te) which is called Thandan in some parts of Malabar area, that section is also entitled to be treated as a Scheduled Caste, for Thandans throughout the State are deemed to be a Scheduled Caste by reason of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes Order as it now stands. Once Thandans throughout the State are entitled to be treated as a Scheduled Caste by reason of the Scheduled Castes Order as it now stands, it is not open to the State Government to say otherwise, as it has purported to do in the 1987 order. (Emphasis supplied) 25. What followed from the above is that Thandans regardless whether they were Ezhuvas/Thiyyas known as Thandans belonging to the Malabar area, were by reason of the above pronouncement of this Court held entitled to the benefit of being treated as scheduled caste by the Presidential Order, any enquiry into their being Thandans who were scheduled caste having been forbidden by this Court as legally impermissible. The distinction which the State Government sought to make between Ezhuva/Thiyyas known as Thandans like the Respondent on one hand and Thandans who fell in the scheduled caste category, on the other, thus stood abolished by reason of the above pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sought to be made between 'Thandans' who were Ezhuvas and Thiyyas and those who were scheduled caste was held to be impermissible and non est in the eye of law. The law declared by this Court in Pattika Jathi's case (supra) entitled all Thandans including those who were Ezhuvas and Thiyyas from Cochin and Malabar region to claim the scheduled caste status. That entitlement could be taken away retrospectively only by specific provisions to that effect or by necessary intendment. We see no such specific provision or intendment in the amending legislation to hold that the entitlement was taken away retrospectively so as to affect even those who had already benefited from the reservation for scheduled caste candidates. At any rate, a certificate issued to an Ezhuvas known as Thandan who was a native of Cochin and Malabar region of the State could not be withdrawn as The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 did not make a distinction between the two categories of Thandans till the Amendment Act of 2007 for the first time introduced such a difference. 29. That apart the question of ouster of Ezhuvas and Thiyyas known as Thandan on account of the confusion that prevai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... If "Halba-Koshti" has been treated as "Halba" even before the Appellant joined service as a teacher and if the only reason for her ouster is the law declared by this Court in Milind case, there is no reason why the protection against the ouster given by this Court to appointees whose applications had become final should not be extended to the Appellant also. The Constitution Bench had in Milind case noticed the background in which the confusion had prevailed for many years and the fact that appointments and admissions were made for a long time treating "Koshti" as a Scheduled Tribe and directed that such admissions and appointments wherever the same had attained finality will not be affected by the decision taken by this Court. 31. In Sandeep Subhash Parate v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.(2006) 7 SCC 501, also dealing with a similar confusion between 'Halba' and 'Halba-Koshti' and applying the principle underlying in Milind's case (supra) this Court held that ouster of candidates who have obtained undeserved benefit will be justified only where the Court finds the claim to be bona fide. In State of Maharashtra v. Sanjay K. Nimj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
