certificate issued by Mamlatdar, Daman & Diu. Hence it was not a selection process restricted and/or confined to the candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste category, hailing only from Daman. In these circumstances, it is quite surprising as to how the Superintending Engineer could doubt the caste certificate dated February 4, 2002 of the respondent and insist for a fresh caste certificate from the respondent. If this be so, considering that the first petitioner is an Union Territory which would be administered by the President by virtue of Article 239 of the Constitution, the law as laid down by the Supreme Court in S. Pushpa & Others versus Sivachanmugavelu & Others (2005) 3 Supreme Court Cases 1, in our opinion, would squarely apply. In such decision, the Supreme Court was considering a question whether selection and appointments of migrant Scheduled Caste candidates from the other States, against quota reserved for Scheduled Castes, in recruitment to the posts of Selection Grade Teachers, in the Union Territory of Pondicherry, was illegal and invalid. The Tribunal had held such selection and appointments to be illegal and invalid. The Supreme Court reversing the decision of the tribunal held that the migrants belonging to the reserved category were eligible to apply for the post in question, when the selection was not confined to candidates belonging to the State or Union Territory. It was further held that the Union Territory by virtue of its peculiar position being
