YOGESH RAMCHANDRA NAIKWADI versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Citation: [2008] 5 S.C.R. 456 · Decided: 07-03-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

(2008] 5 S.C.R. 456 
A 
YOGESH RAMCHANDRA NAIKWADI 
V. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 2079 of 2008) 
8 
MARCH 7, 2008 
[K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJ. & R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J.] 
"' 
Education - Admission - Appellant, claiming to be 
member of the Scheduled Tribe, sought admission to 
c Engineering Course -
Caste claim rejected by Scrutiny 
Committee - Writ petition - High Court passed interim order 
directing the Director of Technical Education to accept the 
admission form of Appellant without insisting upon the 
validation of caste and to process the same as if Appellant 
D belonged to Scheduled Tribe - Appellant granted benefit of 
reservation and admitted to Engineering course -
He 
completed the course and was conferred degree - Writ petition 
filed by Appellant ultimately dismissed thereby upholding the 
order of Scrutiny Committee - Direction given 'by High Court 
E for recall of the degree granted to Appellant - Challenge to -
Held: If Appellant's admission or degree is to be annulled, it is 
to nobody's benefit as his seat cannot be offered to someone 
else - There is also no allegation that Appellant forged or faked 
the caste certificate - His admission to engineering course 
F 
was nearly thirteen years back and he secured the degree 
more than four years back - Therefore, Appellant permitted to 
retain the benefit of the degree but subject to certain terms. 
Appellant sought admission to Engineering course 
claiming benefit of reservation on the ground that he 
G belonged to a Scheduled Tribe. The Scrutiny Committee 
.
rejected the claim of Appellant after verification of his caste 
certificate. Appellant challenged the order of Scrutiny 
Committee by filing writ petition. High Court passed 
.. 
interim order directing Respondent No.3 (Director of 
H 
456 
) 
YOGESH RAMCHANDRA NAIKWADI v. STATE OF 
457 
MAHARASHTRA & ORS. 
Technical Education, State of Maharashtra) to accept the A 
application of appellant for admission by treating him as 
a candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribe, but with the 
condition that the admission was provisional and subject 
to final decision of the Court. Appellant was granted the 
benefit of reservation and admitted to the Engineering B 
course. He completed_ the course and was conferred 
degree. Two years thereafter, writ petition filed by 
Appellant was dismissed thereby upholding the order of 
Scrutiny Committee. Direction was given by the High 
Court to Respondent No.3 to take appropriate steps for c 
recall of the degree granted to the Apiiellant. 
· 
In appeal to this Court, it was contended by the 
Appellant that even if his Scheduled Tribe claim was. 
rejected, he should not have been denied the benefit of 
degree obtained by him. In support of this contention, he D 
relied on the decisions of this Court in Mi/ind* and R. 
Vishwanatha Pillai** case. 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD:1.1. In Mi/ind and Vishwanatha Pillai, the E 
candidates apparently believed that they belonged to a 
scheduled tribe/caste when they sought admission and 
were admitted. Further, their caste certificates showing 
them as belonging to a scheduled tribe/caste had not 
been invalidated when they were admitted to the course. 
F 
The direction in both cases permitting retention of degree · 
~-
was in exercise of power under Article 142 of the 
Constitution. [Para 5] [462-D & E] 
1.2. There may however be cases where it will not be 
proper to permit the student to retain the degree obtained G 
by making a false claim. One .example is where the 
candidates secure seats by producing forged or fake 
caste certificates. There may be cases, where knowing 
full well that they do not belong to a scheduled tribe/caste, 
candidates may make a false claim that they belong to a H 
458 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 5 S.C.R. 
A scheduled tribe/caste. There may also be cases where 
even before the date of admission, the caste certificates 
of the candidates might have been invalidated on 
verification by the Scrutiny Committee. There may be 
cases where the admissions may be in pursuance of 
B interim orders granted by courts subject to final decision 
making it clear that the candidate will not be entitled to 
claim any equities by reason of the admission. The benefit 
extended in Mi/ind and Vishwanatha Pillai, cannot 
obviously be extended uniformly to all such cases. Each 
c case may have to be considered on its own merits. Further 
what has precedential value is the ratio decidendi of

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.