HC upholds dismissal of Ayush doctor over false caste certificate

Bengaluru: The high court has upheld the dismissal of an Ayush doctor who obtained the job by producing a false caste certificate. Dr Guddadev, the petitioner, had obtained employment as an Ayush medical officer in September 1995 representing himself as belonging to the Gonda caste which comes under the Scheduled Tribe category.

An enquiry was held based on a complaint given by the district Ayush officer and it was found that he belongs to the Kuruba community, coming under the Backward Castes category. The authorities cancelled his caste certificate and terminated his appointment in September 2014.

The petitioner contended that the Kuruba and Gonda communities are the same in Kalaburagi district and these words are used as synonyms. He also questioned the delay in taking the action.

C  Jagadish, special counsel for the government, argued that if a person has obtained a caste certificate by making false representation at the inception, no benefit could be granted to such person at a future point of time.  

The court perused the certificates and observed that the petitioner had pursued his education as a person belonging to the Backward Class community. “..knowing fully well that he does not belong to the Scheduled Tribe, he suppressed the material facts and was able to get employment as a Scheduled Tribe person by not only creating a false document in the form of a caste certificate and produced before the employer and gained himself, but also denied a fair chance of a Scheduled Tribe person being appointed for the said post,” Justice V Srishananda said.

The court also negated the submission over delay in taking action. “The question of delay in taking the action cannot be taken advantage of by the petitioner since if a fraud has been committed by a person at the inception and obtained benefit thereof, there cannot be any limitation to question the said fraudulent act. A fraudulent document is non est from the beginning and any benefits taken thereof cannot also be countenanced in law on the ground of delay and mercy.”