High Court · 2025

WP No. 10354 of 2021IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 03-11-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.S. RAMESHANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVELW.P. No. 10354 of 20211. T.G.Mani ReddyS/o.Late. T.Govindaraj, No.4, Sri Ram Avenue Ramani Nagar, 3rd Street Extension, Tambaram West, Chennai 600 045.Petitioner(s)Vs1. The Tamil Nadu State levelScrutiny committee -II, Adidravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Namakkal Kavingar Malaigai, Secretariat, Chennai 600009. Rep. by its Chairman,2.The Senior Superintendent RMS,Department of Posts, Chennai Airmail Sorting Division, Chennai 600 016.3.Parliamentry Committee on theWelfare of Scheduled casts and Scheduled Tribes, Lok Sabha secretariat, Room No.010 (G./F), https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021Parliament House Annexe, New Delhi 110001, Rep. by its Joint Secretary. (R3 - deleted vide order dated 26.04.2021 made in W.P.10354 of 2021 by NKKJ and TVTSJ)4.The Revenue Divisional Officer,Tiruttani.5.The Tahsildar,Tiruttani. (R4, R5 Suo-motu impleaded vide order dated 26.04.2021 made in W.P.10354 of 2021 by NKKJ and TVTSJ)...Respondent(s)PRAYERThe Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the order passed by the Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee - II in proceedings No.13736/CV - 4(1)/2017- 8 dated 05.01.2021 on the file of the 1st respondent and to quash the same.For Petitioner(s):Mr. S.DoraisamyFor Respondent(s):Mr.G.AmeediusGovernment Advocate for R1, R4 and R5Mr.V.T.BalajiStanding Counsel for R2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021ORDER(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.)The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the order passed by the Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee - II in proceedings No.13736/CV - 4(1)/2017- 8 dated 05.01.2021 on the file of the 1st respondent and to quash the same.2. The petitioner herein was issued a Community Certificate, certifying that he belongs to Kondareddis community, which is classified as Scheduled Tribe Community. When the said certificate came up for scrutiny before the State Level Scrutiny Committee, it was concluded that the Kondareddis (Scheduled Tribe) Community Certificate held by the petitioner herein is not correct. Consequently, the State Level Scrutiny Committee cancelled the said Community Certificate through its order dated 05.01.2021. Challenging the said order, the present Writ Petition has been filed. 3. The main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the enquiry was conducted by the State Level Scrutiny Committee on https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 202123.11.2020 and 21.12.2020, during which period, there were Covid restrictions and the petitioner, being a Senior Citizen, could not attend the proceedings. 4. The learned Government Advocate on the other hand would submit that the State Level Scrutiny Committee had come to a conclusion that the petitioner's community certificate was invalid based on the Anthropologist's report and several other evidences and therefore, no interference is required to the order of the Committee.5. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in a similar circumstance, in the case of M.Rangan Vs. the Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-II, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Chennai, in batch of Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos.10006 of 2021, etc. batch, when an enquiry was conducted by the State Level Scrutiny committee during the Covid restrictions period, had interfered with the order passed therein and set aside the same. Though the order was set aside, it was held therein that the restoration of the petitioner's community certificate, will not entitle his legal heirs to claim similar https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021certificates, but, rather they are required to establish their communal status on their own before the authority concerned. The said order reads as follows:-“All these cases relate to cancellation of community certificates by the State Level Scrutiny Committee, where the petitioners were called for enquiry during the period when the Covid restrictions were in force. The following tabulation would demonstrate the facts that are necessary for disposal of these writ petitions:-WP.No.Name of the petitionerIssuance of certificateDate of AppointmentDate of SuperannuationDate of SLSC EnquiryDate of the order of SLSC10006/2021Rangan1976197730.06.2016 (Sanctioned full pension and all benefits)December 202002.02.202110009/2021Krishnan 1976197731.08.2014 (Sanctioned full pension and all benefits)16.12.202002.02.202110013/2021Thandugan1974197530.04.2015 (getting only provisional pension)07.12.202004.01.202110017/2021P.E.Shanmugam1980198031.03.2017 (getting only provisional pension)16.11.202016.12.202025.01.202110023/2021Sarojini1976197831.05.2015 (getting only provisional pension)26.11.202006.12.202005.02.202110975/2021N. Lakshmikanthan1972198131.10.201311.08.198810.08.200511.01.202113291/2021Jayanthi Rajan1982198231.05.2019 (getting only provisional 26.11.202006.12.202013.01.2021 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021pension)13295/2021P.V.Ponnusamy1976197730.04.2013 (sanctioned full pension and all benefits)16.12.202019.01.202113300/2021M.Vedanayaki1978197930.04.2012 (sanctioned full pension and all benefits)25.11.202016.12.202008.02.202113302/2021R.Rajasulochana1979198431.05.2019 (sanctioned full pension and all benefits)16.12.202002.02.202113594/2021V.Kamala1980198004.01.2020 (VRS) (sanctioned full pension and all benefits)16.12.202002.02.202119126/2021P.Nirmala1982198230.06.2020 (provisional pension paid but, stopped after SLSC order)July 202105.08.202119128/2021S.Mathivanan1982198231.03.2017 (getting only provisional pension19.07.202112.08.202113.08.202122355/2021C.Jeyaprakasam1976197731.01.201427.01.202105.08.202126784/2021R.Subbian1976197631.10.2014(sanctioned full pension and all benefits)25.11.202016.12.202017.02.20212. From the Tabulation, it could be seen that all the petitioners in the above writ petitions have attained superannuation between 2012 and 2020 before the cancellation of certificates issued to them. Though the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021petitioners urged several contentions, we find that it may not be necessary for us to go into all those contentions, since we find that the petitioners were denied a fair opportunity in the conduct of enquiry. Admittedly, all the petitioners were called for enquiry during November, December 2020, January 2021 and July 2021. Admittedly, during these periods either lock down or restrictions on movement were in place. All the petitioners had superannuated by that time and they were admittedly Senior Citizens. General advisories were issued by the Government of India advising Senior citizens not to venture out. After all these enquiries have been pending for years and we are unable to see any justification for the hurried manner in which, the enquiries have been conducted during November, December, 2020 and the orders were passed during January and February, 2021. Even in Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and others, reported in (1994) 6 SCC 241, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that the petitioners should be given a fair opportunity to make their representations before the State Level Scrutiny Committee. 3. We find that the absence of opportunity really vitiates all the reports of the State Level Scrutiny Committee.4. On similar set of facts, in L.Balasubramanian Vs. The State Level Scrutiny Committee and others [WP.No.6122 of 2021 dated 08.01.2025] this Court held as follows:-“8. As we have adverted to, the notice was issued on 16.11.2020 requiring the petitioner to appear before the Committee on 14.12.2020. Admittedly the COVID restrictions were in place during the months of November and December 2020. There was a lock-down announced till 31.12.2020 under G.O.(Ms) No.541, Revenue and Disaster Management (D.M.IV) Department, dated 30.09.2020 and large scale restrictions were there and persons above 60 years of age and persons with co-morbidities were advised to stay at home. It is in this situation the Committee had gone ahead with the enquiry https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021rejecting the request for adjournment made by the petitioner.9. We therefore find that the petitioner was denied a fair opportunity by the State Level Scrutiny Committee. There was no such tearing urgency for the Committee to go ahead with the determination as the employee had retired by then and the Railways had not paid him the retiral benefits. We must point out that this court in the year 2000 directed an enquiry by the State Level Scrutiny Committee and the committee swung in to action only in the year 2016 after 16 years. It is the fundamental principles of law that a person whose certificate is sought to be cancelled should be given a fair opportunity by the Committee, which takes up the enquiry. Absence of reasonable opportunity itself is a good ground to set aside the proceedings of the Committee.10. We therefore conclude that the action of the Committee in proceeding with the enquiry when COVID restrictions were in place, that too, without hearing the petitioner has considerably prejudiced the cause of the petitioner and therefore the order of the State Level Scrutiny Committee is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the order of the State Level Scrutiny Committee dated 02.02.2021 impugned in the Writ Petition will stand set aside. 11. Normally we should direct the State Level Scrutiny Committee to take up the matter again and re-determine the issue after hearing the petitioner. But, we find that no useful purpose will be served by directing such re-enquiry. Admittedly, the petitioner has retired on 31.07.2016 itself. Therefore, the determination of the genuineness of his community would only be academic. As already pointed out though a Division Bench of this Court as early as on 22.11.2000 directed re-enquiry by the State Level Scrutiny Committee, the Committee did not take up the issue till 2016. The District Level https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021Vigilance Cell submitted its report on 24.11.2016 i.e., after the retirement of the petitioner. We therefore do not think it would be proper for us to direct an inquiry in to the issue at this distant point of time.”5. We therefore do not propose to remit the matters to the State Level Scrutiny Committee. Hence, we have no other option to set aside all the orders in the impugned writ petitions. We however make it clear that the certificates which have been issued to the petitioners will not form the basis for any further certificates in favour of the petitioners' children or grand-children. If the children or grand-children or any other blood relatives of the petitioners want to apply for a certificate to the effect that they belong to Scheduled Tribe Community, they will have to establish the fact that they belong to a Scheduled Tribe Community de hors the certificate issued to the petitioners.6. In WP.Nos.10013, 10017, 10023, 13291, 19126 and 22355 of 2021, there will be a direction to the respective employers to pay full pension and disburse the retiral benefits to the respective petitioners, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.7. All the petitioners will surrender their original certificates to the concerned District Collector’s Office, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The learned Additional Government Pleader will also instruct the concerned District Collectors to ensure surrender. No costs. Consequently, connected WMPs are also closed.”6. The aforesaid decision in the batch of Writ Petitions clearly applies to the facts and circumstances of the case on hand. Admittedly, the enquiry conducted preceding the impugned order dated 05.01.2021 was on 23.11.2020 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021and 21.12.2020, during which period there were Covid restrictions. While that being so, the State Level Scrutiny Committee was totally partial and unjustified in recording the absence of the petitioner, who was a senior citizen and passing an ex-parte order. As such , the conclusion arrived at by the State Level Scrutiny Committee may warrant interference in the light of the decision in M.Rangan's case cited supra. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 05.01.2021 in Proceedings No.13736/CV-4(1)/2017-8, dated 05.01.2021 on the file of the 1st respondent is set aside. However, it is made clear that the community certificate issued to the petitioner herein, shall not form the basis for the children / grand children or other blood relatives, to claim their communal status and that they will have to establish their communal status dehors the certificate issued to the petitioner herein. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 20218. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. (M.S.RAMESH J.) (R.SAKTHIVEL J.)03-11-2025ASIIndex:Yes Speaking Order Internet:YesNeutral Citation:Yes To1. The Chairman, The Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee -II, Adidravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Namakkal Kavingar Malaigai, Secretariat, Chennai 600009.2.The Senior Superintendent RMS,Department of Posts, Chennai Airmail Sorting Division, Chennai 600 016.3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,Tiruttani.4.The Tahsildar,Tiruttani. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 2021M. S. RAMESH, J.ANDR. SAKTHIVEL, J.ASIW.P. No. 10354 of 2021 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 10354 of 202103-11-2025