<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday protected a group of employees from a nationalised bank and a government undertaking who faced termination notice as their status as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were withdrawn following a Constitution bench decision in 2001.</p><p>A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta quashed the show cause notices issued to K Nirmala and others and set aside the Karnataka High Court's judgments refusing any relief to them.</p><p>Of the four appellants, two belonged to Kotegara (SC) and two Kuruba (ST) community.</p><p>The court said there was no dispute over the fact that the appellants obtained their caste certificates by following the due process of law.</p><p>It thus held the appellants are entitled to protection of their services by virtue of the circular of March 29, 2003 issued by the Government of Karnataka as ratified by communication of August 17, 2005 by the Ministry of Finance. </p>.Courts can't shy away from preliminary inquiry into SC/ST Act cases to consider pre-arrest bail: Supreme Court.<p>"When these caste certificates were issued, the synonymous caste, as of the appellants had been included in the list of Scheduled Castes by virtue of the circular issued by the Government of Karnataka, albeit by exercising powers that were not vested in the State," the bench said.</p><p>However, the Constitution bench decision in 'State of Maharashtra Vs Milind' in 2001 held neither the state government nor the courts have the authority to modify the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribe as promulgated by the Presidential order.</p><p>The appellants contended the effect of the cancellation of the caste certificates after the judgment in Milind case would only deprive them from claiming any additional or future service benefits including promotion etc based on their reserved category status. </p><p>"However, considering the fact that the caste certificates issued to the appellants under the previous inclusions made by the state government to the Scheduled Castes list, albeit under a legal misconception was not obtained through misrepresentation or fraud, the state government took the pragmatic decision to protect the employment of those individuals who had been benefited by these caste certificates obtained prior to issuance of the Government circulars dated 11th March, 2002 and 29th March, 2003," the bench said.</p><p>The bench also noted the circular of March 29, 2003 issued by the Government of Karnataka specifically extended protection to various castes, including those which were excluded in the earlier Government circular of March 11, 2002.</p><p>This subsequent circular covered the castes such as Kotegara, Kotekshathriya, Koteyava, Koteyar, Ramakshathriya, Sherugara, and Sarvegara, thus, ensuring that individuals of these castes, holding Scheduled Castes certificates issued prior to de-scheduling, would be entitled to claim protection of their services albeit as unreserved candidates for all future purposes, the bench said.</p><p>Additionally, the communication issued by the Ministry of Finance on August 17, 2005 reinforced the protective umbrella to the concerned bank employees and also saved them from departmental and criminal action, the bench pointed out.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday protected a group of employees from a nationalised bank and a government undertaking who faced termination notice as their status as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were withdrawn following a Constitution bench decision in 2001.</p><p>A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta quashed the show cause notices issued to K Nirmala and others and set aside the Karnataka High Court's judgments refusing any relief to them.</p><p>Of the four appellants, two belonged to Kotegara (SC) and two Kuruba (ST) community.</p><p>The court said there was no dispute over the fact that the appellants obtained their caste certificates by following the due process of law.</p><p>It thus held the appellants are entitled to protection of their services by virtue of the circular of March 29, 2003 issued by the Government of Karnataka as ratified by communication of August 17, 2005 by the Ministry of Finance. </p>.Courts can't shy away from preliminary inquiry into SC/ST Act cases to consider pre-arrest bail: Supreme Court.<p>"When these caste certificates were issued, the synonymous caste, as of the appellants had been included in the list of Scheduled Castes by virtue of the circular issued by the Government of Karnataka, albeit by exercising powers that were not vested in the State," the bench said.</p><p>However, the Constitution bench decision in 'State of Maharashtra Vs Milind' in 2001 held neither the state government nor the courts have the authority to modify the list of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribe as promulgated by the Presidential order.</p><p>The appellants contended the effect of the cancellation of the caste certificates after the judgment in Milind case would only deprive them from claiming any additional or future service benefits including promotion etc based on their reserved category status. </p><p>"However, considering the fact that the caste certificates issued to the appellants under the previous inclusions made by the state government to the Scheduled Castes list, albeit under a legal misconception was not obtained through misrepresentation or fraud, the state government took the pragmatic decision to protect the employment of those individuals who had been benefited by these caste certificates obtained prior to issuance of the Government circulars dated 11th March, 2002 and 29th March, 2003," the bench said.</p><p>The bench also noted the circular of March 29, 2003 issued by the Government of Karnataka specifically extended protection to various castes, including those which were excluded in the earlier Government circular of March 11, 2002.</p><p>This subsequent circular covered the castes such as Kotegara, Kotekshathriya, Koteyava, Koteyar, Ramakshathriya, Sherugara, and Sarvegara, thus, ensuring that individuals of these castes, holding Scheduled Castes certificates issued prior to de-scheduling, would be entitled to claim protection of their services albeit as unreserved candidates for all future purposes, the bench said.</p><p>Additionally, the communication issued by the Ministry of Finance on August 17, 2005 reinforced the protective umbrella to the concerned bank employees and also saved them from departmental and criminal action, the bench pointed out.</p>