G.Sargunavathi Vs Railway Protection Force — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

G.Sargunavathi Vs Railway Protection Force — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Directions issued: the State Level Scrutiny Committee to conduct the enquiry into the genuinity of the petitioner's community and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, preferably within four months from receipt of a copy of the order; the petitioner permitted to participate in the enquiry by producing all documents and evidences; the interim stay already granted by this Court stands vacated; the matter posted after four weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the genuinity of the petitioner's community/community certificate is to be adjudicated by the State Level Scrutiny Committee as the competent authority rather than decided by the High Court. +1 more

Court's answer

The community of the person is to be ascertained by conducting an adjudication based on the documents and evidences by the State Level Scrutiny Committee, which is the competent authority.

Ratio / Principle

The High Court cannot conduct enquiry into the disputed facts relating to community.

Key takeaways

The petitioner is at liberty to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the State Level Scrutiny Committee by producing all the documents and evidences in the case.ratio¶22
The State Level Scrutiny Committee shall proceed with the enquiry and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, preferably within four months from receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras, Division Bench (order made by S.M. Subramaniam J., sitting with K. Rajasekar J.), order dated 21-04-2025 in WMP No. 19229 of 2021 in WP No. 18006 of 2021 (G. Sargunavathi v. Railway Protection Force, Rep. by its Sr. Divisional Scrutiny Commissioner, Southern Railway): Noting that the State Level Scrutiny Committee was yet to enquire into the genuinity of the petitioner's community, the Court held that the community of a person is to be ascertained by adjudication of documents and evidences by the State Level Scrutiny Committee, the competent authority, and that the High Court cannot conduct enquiry into disputed facts relating to community. The petitioner was given liberty to participate in the Committee's enquiry by producing all documents and evidences. The Committee was directed to proceed with the enquiry and pass appropriate orders expeditiously, preferably within four months from receipt of a copy of the order. The interim stay previously granted by the Court was vacated and the matter was posted after four weeks.

WMP No. 19229 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21-04-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

WMP No. 19229 of 2021 IN

WP NO. 18006 OF 2021

G.Sargunavathi Old No.35, New No.58/1, 25th Street Extension, Sathyavanimuthu Street, GKM Colony, Chennai 600 082.

Petitioner(s)

Vs

Railway Protection Force, Rep. by its Sr. Divisional Scrutiny Commissioner, Office of the Sr.Divisional Scrutiny Commissioner, Southern Railway, Moore Market complex, Chennai 600 003.

Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s): Mr.N.G.R.Prasad for M/S Row And Reddy

For Respondent: Mr.P.T.Ramkumar Standing Counsel for Railways

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WMP No. 19229 of 2021

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

It is brought to the notice of this Court that State Level Scrutiny Committee is yet to conduct an enquiry to ascertain the genuinity of the community of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the Committee has to conduct an enquiry and submit a report regarding the genuinity of the community certificate. Stalling the enquiry would cause prejudice to both the parties.

Ultimately, the community of the person is to be ascertained by conducting an adjudication based on the documents and evidences by the State Level Scrutiny Committee, which is the competent authority. High Court cannot conduct enquiry into the disputed facts relating to community. Thus, the petitioner is at liberty to participate in the process of enquiry to be conducted by the State Level Scrutiny Committee by producing all the documents and evidences in this case.

The State Level Scrutiny Committee shall proceed with the enquiry and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WMP No. 19229 of 2021

With this direction, the Interim stay already granted by this Court stands vacated. Post the matter after four weeks.

(S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.)(K.RAJASEKAR J.) 21-04-2025

gd Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WMP No. 19229 of 2021

To

1.Railway Protection Force, Rep. by its Sr. Divisional Scrutiny Commissioner, Office of the Sr.Divisional Scrutiny Commissioner, southern Railway, Moore Market complex, chennai 600 003.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WMP No. 19229 of 2021

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.

AND

K.RAJASEKAR J.

gd

WMP No. 19229 of 2021 IN WP NO. 18006 OF 2021

21-04-2025

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis