Judgment dismisses petition for regularization of sweepers relying on bogus certificates. Court directs authorities to initiate action for fraud.
Writ petition dismissed; respondents directed to initiate appropriate action for fraudulent certificates.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.03.2018 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P(MD)No.13520 of 2011 and WP(MD)Nos. 2 of 2011 and 1 of 2012
1.N.Kumar 2.M.Saradha 3.M.Rukmani 4.S.Ilamathi 5.C.Sundararajan 6.S.Sekar 7.T.Savitiri 8.C.Muthammal 9.P.Gnanavalli 10.R.Veluchamy 11.P.Chithirai Selvi 12.S.Murugesan 13.M.Rathinam ... Petitioners Vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Commissioner, Commissionerate for Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare, Chepauk, Chennai -5. 2.The Welfare Officer, The District Adi Dravidar Tribal Welfare Office, Karur District, Karur. ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Respondents to regularize the Petitioners as Sweepers in the Government Adi Dravidar Welfare Hostels for Boys and Girls at Karur
2
District from the date of joining as a Sweeper and fix the time scale of pay within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioners : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthu, Additional Government Pleader.
ORDER
The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to direct the Respondents to regularize the Petitioners as Sweepers in the Government Adi Dravidar Welfare Hostels for Boys and Girls at Karur District.
2.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents states that the writ petitioners are working as Sweepers in various Government Adi Dravidar Welfare Hostels for Boys and Girls at Karur District, under the control of the second respondent. The writ petitioners are continuously serving as such for more than ten years and are receiving consolidated pay. Therefore, they are not entitled to be regularised in the sanctioned posts in regular time scale of pay. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the writ petitioners states that all the petitioners are working as Sweepers in various Government Adi Dravidar Welfare Hostels for Boys and Girls at Karur District, under the control of the second respondent for more than 10 years and the details of the writ petitioner are setout in paragraph 5 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and the same is extracted as here under:
| Sl. No |
Name | Working Place | Educational Qualification |
Joining date | Date of 10 years completion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | N.Kumar | Government College Boys Hostal, Kulithalai, Karur. |
6thStandard | 14.07.2000 | 13.07.2010 |
| 2 | V.Saradha | Government College Girls Hostel, Kulithalai, Karur. |
12thStandard fail | 09.11.2000 | 08.11.2010 |
| 3 | M.Rukmani | Government College Boys Hostel,Tharagampatti, Karur. |
Known to read & write |
05.11.1999 | 04.11.2009 |
| 4 | S.Sekar | Government College Boys Hostel, Karur |
9thStandard | 13.03.2000 | 12.03.2010 |
| 5 | T.Savithiri | Government College Boys Hostel, Paramathi, Karur |
Known to read & write |
06.12.1999 | 05.12.2009 |
| 6 | K.Muthammal | Government College Boys Hostel, Punnam, Karur |
Known to read & write |
19.11.1999 | 18.11.2000 |
| 7 | P.Ganavalli | Government College Boys Hostel, Esanatham, Karur |
Known to read & write |
25.08.1999 | 24.08.2009 |
| 8 https://hcservices.e |
P.Veluchamy courts.gov.in/hcservices/ |
Government College Boys Hostel, Aravakuichi, Karur |
6thStandard | 22.07.1998 | 21.07.2008 |
3
| Sl. No |
Name | Working Place | Educational Qualification |
Joining date | Date of 10 years completion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | P.Chithirai Selvi |
Government College Boys Hostel, Vellianai, Karur |
10thStandard | 04.12.1998 | 03.12.2008 |
| 10 | S.Ilamathi | Government College Boys Hostel, Krishnarayapuram, Karur |
10thStandard | 19.07.2000 | 18.07.2010 |
| 11 | C.Murugesan | Government College Boys Hostel, Thanthondrimalai, Karur |
Known to read & write |
30.08.2000 | 29.08.2010 |
| 12 | Rathinam | Government College Boys Hostel, Kulithalai, Karur |
Known to read & write |
10.02.1999 | 09.02.2009 |
| 13 | Sundararajan | Government College Boys Hostel, Kadavur, Karur |
9thStandard | 11.2.1998 | 10.12.2008 |
3.The writ petitioners state that they were called for to appear before the second respondent on 25.11.2011 in respect of regularisation of appointment. However, they were not regularly absorbed and allowed to continue in temporary service. The learned Additional Government Pleader states that the petitioners were not appointed as Sweepers on either consolidated pay or in contingent basis by the appointing authority. The appointing authority is the District Social Welfare Officer, Karur. However, it is contended that all the writ petitioners had produced bogus certificates, as if, they had served as Sweepers. The service certificates produced by the writ petitioners were not actually issued by the Warden and Matrons of the concerned hostels.
4.The Special Tahsildar (Adi Dravidar Welfare) Kulithalai, Karur District, who is the pay drawing officer of the said hostels has reported in Letter Roc.No.A2/263/2011, dated 02.12.2011 and 25.11.2011 that N.Kumar and 12 others had never worked as Sweepers in Government Adi Dravidar College /hostels in Karur District either in consolidated or contingent basis. It is further submitted that the petitioners have never been appointed as Sweepers in any of the Adi Dravidar Welfare Hostels in Karur District. The petitioners had produced as stenotyped certificates affixing the seals of the Warden/Matrons of the various Adi Dravidar Welfare Hostels in Karur District, stating that they are working as Sweepers for the post for more than 10 years. It is stated that the Special Tahsildar made necessary enquiry with the Wardens/Matrons and the Special Tahsildar and it was revealed that 13 certificates produced by the writ petitioners are bogus and fraudulent nature. The seals and the signatures affixed in the said certificates are also found as bogus. In view of the bogus certificates produced, the interview scheduled to be held on 22.11.2011 and 23.11.2011 were withheld. The https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ learned Additional Government Pleader states that the writ petitioner had committed fraud and produced bogus service certificates, which were not issued by the competent authority. Such
4
bogus certificates were produced for the purpose of securing Government appointment. Thus, the authorities competent ought to have preferred appropriate Police complaint for initiation of criminal prosecution. However, the learned Additional Government Pleader is unable to the say, whether such action was initiated or not?.
5.At the outset, this Court is of an opinion that the writ petitioners were not appointed by the competent authorities in accordance with the recruitment rules. Thus, the case of the writ petitioners for regularisation or permanent absorption, cannot be considered at all. The legal principles in relation to the regularisation and permanent absorption are now Governed by the legal principles settled in the case of the Secretary, State of Karnataka and others .vs. Umadevi(3) and others reported in (2006) 4 Supreme Court Cases 1. Now all the appointments are to be made by following the prescribed selection process and as per service rules in force. It is brought to the notice of this Court that all the writ petitioners were appointed by the competent authorities and they had submitted bogus certificates and fraudulent certificates for the purpose of securing Government appointment. Thus, it is the duty mandatory on the part of appointing authority to initiate appropriate action against all the persons, who had submitted such bogus service certificates for securing public employment.
6.Under these circumstances, the writ petitioners have not made out any case for grant of regularisation or permanent absorption. The respondents are directed to initiate appropriate action in respect of the production of bogus certificates and fraudulent certificates by the writ petitioners and if any officials were in collusion in this matter, they are also to be prosecuted in accordance with law. Therefore, the 1st respondent, The Commissioner of Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare, Chepauk, Chennai-5, is directed to initiate appropriate action in this regard, in respect of all such bogus certificates and fraudulent certificates and involvement of the officials.
7.With the above observation and direction, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no orders as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/ Assistant Registrar(Crl side)
/True copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Commissioner, State of Tamil Nadu, Commissionerate for Adi Dravidar and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Tribal Welfare, Chepauk, Chennai -5.
5
2.The Welfare Officer, The District Adi Dravidar Tribal Welfare Office, Karur District, Karur.
+1cc to M/s.Special Government Pleader,SR.No. 56945 +1cc to Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, Advocate, SR.No. 56514
W.P(MD)No.13520 of 2011 19.03.2018
dsk KK/KKR/12.04.2018/SAR-4/5P-5C
3 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioners working without permanent appointment can be regularized.
Whether production of bogus certificates entitles petitioners to regularization.
Whether authorities must initiate action against petitioners for fraud in securing appointment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Secretary, State of Karnataka and others vs. UmadeviReferred¶18
Secretary, State of Karnataka and others .vs. Umadevi(3), (2006) 4 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
N.Kumar and others
The State of Tamil Nadu
The Welfare Officer, Karur
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
S.M.Subramaniam
Parties & counsel
