AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.D. Dinakaran, J.—The above appeals are directed against the common order dated 7.4.2005 made in W.P. Nos. 6364 and 6365 of
2005 filed by the respective first respondent in these appeals, who are admittedly sisters and daughters of one M. Venkatachalam and Karpagam,
who belong to two different communities.
For the purpose of clarity, we refer the first respondent in these appeals as writ petitioners.
3.1. The writ petitioners are the daughters born out of the inter-caste marriage between one M. Venkatachalam, who belongs to ''Hindu-Palliyan''
community, a recognised Scheduled Tribe community and one M. Karpagam, who belongs to ''Hindu-Vanniar'' community, which is a Most
Backward Class community. The Tahsildar, Attur, has issued a community certificate dated 30.4.69 to the father of the writ petitioners certifying
that he belongs to Hindu-Palliyan community, a recognised Scheduled Tribe community under the Tamil nadu Educational Rules. Concededly, the
Government by G.O.Ms. No. 477, Social Welfare (BCI) Department, dated 27.6.75, has also directed that the children born of inter-caste
marriages, that is marriages,
(i) between a person of a Scheduled Tribe and another of a Scheduled Caste or Backward Class or Forward Class;
(ii) between a person of a Scheduled Caste and another of a Backward Class or Forward Class; and
(iii) between a person of a Backward Class and of a Forward Class.
will be considered to belong to either the community of the father or the community of the mother, according to the declaration of the parents
regarding the way of life in which the children are brought up and that the declaration in respect of one child will apply to all children.
3.2. Similar notification was also issued during 1980-81 in respect of grant of State Scholarship by the Harijan and Tribal Welfare Department and
the same reads as hereunder:
NOTIFICATION GOVERNING THE GRANT OF STATE SCHOLARSHIP BY THE HARIJAN AND TRIBAL WELFARE
DEPARTMENT.
GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS, 1980-81.
1.(1) At the discretion of the Government of Tamil nadu Scholarships will be awarded by the Harijan and Tribal Welfare Department during the
academic year 1980-81 to pupils belonging to eligible Communities (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other eligible communities and
coverts from them) studying in Elementary, Basic, Secondary, High Schools or Higher Secondary Schools and under-going Collegiate,
Professional, Industrial, Technical and Commercial Courses listed out in Annexures-I to IX to this notification. There is no numerical limit for the
above scholarships of funds and orders of the Government governing sanction of scholarship. The Community of the Children born of inter-caste
marriages, shall be determined with reference to community of the father or the community of the mother according to the declaration of the
parents regarding the way of life in which the children are brought up. The declaration in respect of one child will apply to all children (G.O.Ms.
No. 477, Social Welfare Department, dated 27th June, 1975).
It is pertinent to note that the Tahsildar, Attur, has subsequently issued a certificate dated 10.12.1988 certifying the intercaste marriage of the
parents of the writ petitioners.
3.3. The decision taken in G.O.Ms. No. 477, Social Welfare Department, dated 27.6.75 as to the benefits conferred to the children born out of
inter-caste marriages, was reiterated in G.O.Ms. No. 1509, Revenue Department dated 27.11.91. Following the same, the writ petitioners, the
brothers of the writ petitioners, by name V. Murugan, V. Muthusamy and the elder sister by name V. Muthulakshmi were issued with separate
community certificates certifying that they belong to Hindu-Palliyan community, a recognised ''Scheduled Tribe'' community.
3.4. Subsequently thereafter, an enquiry was initiated as to the genuineness of the community certificate issued to Muthulakshmi, sister of the writ
petitioners, which necessitated the revenue authorities to conduct an enquiry by the District Level Scrutiny Committee as to the genuineness of the
certificate issued to the father of the writ petitioners. But, admittedly, the fact remains that as on date, the community certificate issued to the father
of the writ petitioners as well as to his children are not cancelled either by the District Collector concerned or the District Level Scrutiny
Committee, much less the State Level Scrutiny Committee.
3.5. While so, the writ petitioners, Chitra and Manvizhi were selected by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, the appellate herein, for the
post of Assistant Medical Officer (Siddha/Ayurveda/Unani) in the Tamil Nadu Medical Service for the year 1996-98 and for the post of Assistant
Medical Officer (Siddha/Ayurveda) in Government Hospitals and Dispensaries in the Department of Indian Medicine and Homoeopathy, for the
year 2003-2004 respectively. But, however, the results were withheld by the appellant/Commission for vertification of their community certificates
and hence, they were constrained to approach this Court by filing the above writ petitions for issue of writ of Mandamus to direct the
appellant/Commission to release their names from the withheld list and to forward their names to the Government with a direction to appoint them
to the respective posts of Assistant Medical Officer during the relevent years.
3.6. The learned single Judge, by the impugned common order dated 7.4.2005, while holding that as long as the certificates are not cancelled in a
manner known to law, the same have to be given effect to, directed the appellant/Commission to issue appropriate orders within two weeks giving
liberty to respondents 2 and 3 herein to cancel any order in the event of the State Scrutiny Committee holding against the writ petitioners.
Aggrieved by the said order of the learned single Judge, the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission has moved the present appeals.
Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the respective learned Counsel for the respondents, who reiterated their submissions
made before the learned single Judge.
5.1. It is settled law that until the community certificate, which is issued by a competent authority is cancelled in a manner known to law, a person
cannot be denied the benefit of such certificate, merely on account of some suspicion regarding the same, vide the decision of the Apex Court in R.
Kandasamy Vs. Chief Engineer, Madras Port Trust, .
5.2. Concededly, in the instant case, the community certificate dated 30.4.69 issued to the father of the writ petitioners as well as the community
certificates dated 10.12.88 issued to the writ petitioners have not yet been cancelled either by the District Collector, or the District Level
Committee or the State Level Scrutiny Committee and they are still in force. As long as the said community certificates are not yet cancelled as on
date and the writ petitioners are entitled to the benefit of G.O.Ms. No. 477, dated 27.6.1975 and G.O.Ms. No. 1509, dated 27.11.91, which are
applicable to the children born out of the inter-caste marriages to claim that they belong to either of the community of their parents as declared by
them, the benefits that the writ petitioners are entitled to get as a scheduled tribe based on the said community certificates cannot be denied by the
appellant by acting as an appellate authority to the order passed by the revenue authorities. The role of the Service Commission is only to examine
the community certificates as to whether they are true or genuine and not to test the correctness of information given in the said certificates. Once
the revenue authorities, as in the instant case, has exercised their jurisdiction and issued the community certificates certifying that the writ petitioners
belong to Hindu-Palliyan community, a recognised scheduled tribe community, by virtue of the community certificate issued to their father, as they
born out of the inter-caste marriage, seeking the benefit under the different G.Os. issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu, referred to above,
which are still in force, the appellant/Commission could not assume either appellate or revisionary power to sit over on the decision of the revenue
authorities as an appellate or revisionary authority.
The act of the appellant/Commission in withholding the results of the writ petitioners for their direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Medical
Officer during 1996-98 and 2003-2004 respectively, on the ground of verification of the community certificates, ignoring the relevant fact that the
community certificates dated 10.12.1988 issued to them by the competent authority that they belong to Hindu-Palliyan community, a recognised
scheduled tribe community, have not yet been cancelled as on date, is, in our considered opinion, not only unjustifiable, aribitrary and unreasonable
but also lacks power, authority and jurisdiction.
In fact, the learned single Judge has also given liberty to the appellant/Commission as well as to the appointing authority, viz. respondents 2 and
3, to cancel the order of appointment in the event of the State Level Scrutiny Committee holding against the writ petitioners that they do not belong
to the scheduled tribe community. Even then, the appellant/Commission had chosen to drag the issue without any justification.
For the reasons aforementioned, we are constrained to dismiss the writ appeals making it clear that the publication of the results and the
appointment of the writ petitioners as Assistant Medical Officers during relevant years, viz., 1996-98 and 2003-2004 respectively, shall be subject
to the orders to be passed by the competent authorities in the proceedings initiated if any against the writ petitioners for cancelling their respective
community certificates and giving liberty to the Government to cancel the appointment orders in the event of holding against the writ petitioners.
The appellant/Commission and the authorities concerned shall pass appropriate orders within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of
copy of this order.
In the result, the writ appeals are dismissed with a cost of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupess five thousand only) to each of the writ petitioners payable by the
appellant/Commission.