IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23.2.2010 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMARAO AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL Writ Petition No.12856 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 S.Devendran ... Petitioner Vs. State Level Scrutiny Committee, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Namakkal Kavignar Maligai, Third Floor, Secretariat, Chennai-600009, rep.by its Chairman ... Respondent * * * Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the cancellation of community certificate of the petitioner in proceedings No.22046/CVII/04, dated 28.4.2008 on the file of the respondent and quash the same. * * * For petitioner : Mr.S.Doraisamy For respondent : Mrs.Malarvizhi Udayakumar, Spl.G.P. * * * O R D E R
ELIPE DHARMARAO, J.
The case of the petitioner is that he belonged to ‘Malakkuravan’ community, which is a Scheduled Tribe community; that on 15.6.1987, he obtained a community certificate from Tahsildar, Kallakuruchi and he passed B.Sc. in the year 1992 and in his school and college records, his community was entered as ‘Malakkuravan’ which is classified as a Scheduled Tribe community; that the above said community certificate was referred to the Tahsildar, Kallakurichi by the Deputy Director, District Employment Office, Chennai on 8.6.2000 in reference No.A6/8884/2000 for which the Tahsildar, Kallakurichi in his proceedings in Na.Ka.A5/10221/2000, dated 7.10.2000 had reported that after verifying the records he found that the above community certificate was issued to the petitioner on 16.6.1987 bearing No.3402-3403 stating that he belong to ‘Malakkuravan’ community; that on 27.3.2001, he obtained the community certificate from Revenue Divisional (RDO), Kallakurichi that he belonged to ‘Malakkuravan’ community, which is classified as a Scheduled Tribe community.
2. According to the petitioner, in the year 2003, he preferred an application for the post of Executive Officer Grade-IV in Group VIII services and he has also preferred an application for the appointment of Development Officer in Life Insurance Corporation of India and the LIC directed him to get community certificate from the Revenue Divisional Officer in the format issued by them and accordingly, he obtained community certificate from the RDO, Kallakurichi on 9.4.2002 in proceedings K.Dis.A7/2282/2002 that he belong to Malakkuravan community; that on 14.5.2003, the Deputy Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission had referred his community certificate dated 27.3.2001 to the District Collector, Villupuram, who in turn referred the case to RDO., Kallakurichi to cause verification and report and according to the petitioner, no enquiry was conducted either by RDO or by the District Level Vigilance Committee; that on 18.8.2004, the District Level Vigilance Committee forwarded the matter to the State Level Committee, because the community certificate issued by the RDO can be verified only by the State Level Committee and the petitioner attended for the enquiry on 28.9.2005. According to the petitioner, his signature was obtained to mark his presence, but no enquiry was conducted and for the enquiry dated 26.11.2005, he sent a letter to the respondent requesting to postpone the enquiry to some other date, however, for the enquiry dated 28.7.2006 and 16.10.2006, he did not receive any notice from the respondent; that thereafter, on 5.1.2007, the respondent issued a notice to appear for enquiry to be held on 25.1.2007, but the respondent in his letter dated 19.1.2007 informed him that the enquiry is postponed to some other date and the date will be informed later, but, thereafter, he did not receive any notice for enquiry from the respondent for the enquiry said to have been conducted on 23.4.2007 and 27.2.2008; that on 28.4.2008, the respondent passed an order, cancelling his community certificate issued by the RDO, Kallakurichi dated 27.3.2001, finding that he belong to ‘C.K.Koravar’ community, which is a denotified Tribe as per the Government order and also directed the District Collector, Villupuram to initiate criminal action against him. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has come forward to file this writ petition.
3. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent. But, the learned Special Government Pleader, placing reliance on the impugned order would submit that the petitioner did not avail the opportunities afforded to him by the respondent and on a thorough analysis of all the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent has arrived at the conclusion that the petitioner does not belong to ‘Malakkravan’ community, which is a Scheduled Tribe community, but belong to ‘C.K.Koravar’ community, a denotified community and therefore, no interference is called for by this Court into the impugned order passed by the respondent and prayed to dismiss this writ petition.
4. Though in the impugned order, it has been mentioned that the petitioner did not appear before the Committee on 28.9.2005, 26.11.2005, 28.7.2006, 16.10.2006 and 23.4.2007 and in spite of granting sufficient opportunities for producing documentary evidence to prove his community, he did not avail the same, on the part of the petitioner it has been strenuously argued that he attended for the enquiry dated 28.9.2005, but no enquiry was conducted on that date and for the enquiry dated 26.11.2005, he sent a letter to the respondent to postpone the enquiry to some other date and for the enquiries dated 28.7.2006 and 16.10.2006, he did not receive any notice from the respondent. It has also been submitted on the part of the petitioner that on 5.1.2007, the respondent issued a notice to appear4 for enquiry to be held on 25.1.2007, but the respondent in his letter dated 19.1.2007 informed him that the enquiry is postponed to some other date and the date will be informed later and thereafter, he did not receive any notice for the enquiry from the respondent. In spite of such a strenuous and stout denial of the stand taken by the petitioner regarding the alleged opportunities afforded to him by the respondent, the respondent has not filed any counter-affidavit in this writ petition or produced any material to substantiate their plea that sufficient opportunities are afforded to the petitioner, which he failed to avail. In these circumstances, a reasonable suspicion arises in our minds as to whether the well established principles of audi alteram partem have been duly complied with by the respondent, before passing the impugned order. Naturally, the benefit of such a suspicion will have to be granted to the affected party – in this case the petitioner.
5. The other thing which needs to be pointed out is that in Para no.6 of the impugned order, the respondent has stated that the signature of the authority, who issued the community certificate is not available, but the copy of the community certificate issued by the RDO, Kallakurichi, dated 27.3.2001, available at page No.3 of the typed set of papers makes it clear that the said authority has signed the certificate, which makes it clear that the respondent has dealt with the matter in a very casual and pre-determined manner, which is unwarranted.
6. For these reasons, we do not propose to go into various other aspects dealt with by the respondent in their impugned order, since, in our considered view, a fresh enquiry needs to be conducted by the respondent, by strictly adhering to the well established principles of audi alteram partem and in a time bound manner.
Therefore, this writ petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned order and remitting the matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration, un-influenced by any of the findings recorded by him in the impugned order, after affording all reasonable and sufficient opportunities to the petitioner to put forth his case. Since the issue is pending for quite a long time, the respondent is directed to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the petitioner is directed to render his full cooperation to the respondent in completing the enquiry and passing the final orders. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2008 is closed.
Rao
To
The Chairman,
State Level Scrutiny Committee,
Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department,
Namakkal Kavignar Maligai,
Third Floor,
Secretariat,
Chennai 600009