The main legal point established in the judgment is that a dismissal order cannot stand if the reasons for initiating proceedings against the petitioner are not sustainable, and the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement with back wages from the date of his representation.

1. The prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order of the first respondent dated 9.12.2011 rejecting the request of the petitioner for reinstatement into service and for a direction to reinstate the petitioner in respondent's office with all back wages. By consent the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this writ petition are as follows:

(a) The petitioner's father E. Shanmugam while working as Royal Navy Soldier in Chennai Port Trust died in harness on 29.8.1974. Petitioner and his mother Kuppusammal are the legal heirs of the deceased E. Shanmugam. Petitioner's mother gave her consent for considering the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds and the petitioner was appointed as Shed and Wharf Mazdoor on 25.7.1989 in Traffic department on compassionate grounds. Petitioner produced community certificate to show his community and school certificate to show his educational qualification at the time of joining duty.

(b) According to the petitioner, his name having not been found in the legal heir certificate, he was directed to produce an order from the City Civil Court, declaring that he is the son of the said E. Shanmugam, pursuant to which he filed a civil suit in O.S. No. 1616 of 1986 on the file of V Assistant City Civil Court, Madras and the said suit was decreed on 14.8.1987. On production of the said judgment only petitioner was given appointment on 25.7.1989.

(c) The second respondent issued a charge memo on 25.5.2001 stating that the petitioner has produced bogus community certificate and bogus school certificate at the time of joining duty. The said charge memo was issued after 14 years of his service and ultimately he was dismissed from service on the said two grounds. According to the petitioner, at the time of joining duty, his mother gave a wrong school certificate to the respondent office. The petitioner studied in the Corporation Middle School, Jaganathapuram, Chetpet, Chennai and produced certificate to that effect as proof of his qualification.

(d) Petitioner filed civil suit in O.S. No. 5045 of 2002 and challenged the order of dismissal and the XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Madras decreed the said suit by judgment and decree dated 17.12.2004, against which the Chennai Port Trust preferred A.S. No. 549 of 2005 and the VI Additional City Civil Court, Chennai dismissed the appeal by judgment and decree dated 31.8.2006. Against the said judgment and decree the Chennai Port Trust filed S.A. No. 1045 of 2007 before this Court. Petitioner also filed W.P. No. 36358 of 2005 and prayed for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the Port Trust to implement the Civil Court judgment and decree dated 17.12.2004. The second appeal was allowed by this Court by judgment dated 14.2.2011 on the ground that the Civil Court is not the competent forum to challenge the order of dismissal and the remedy open to the petitioner is to raise a dispute u/s 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(e) Petitioner's community certificate was also sent for verification before the State Level Scrutiny Committee, which also found that the petitioner's community certificate as genuine. Based on the findings given by the State Level Scrutiny Committee, petitioner prayed for reinstatement in service. The Division Bench in W.P. No. 36358 of 2005 by order dated 14.2.2011 held that it is open to the petitioner to approach the respondent viz. Chennai Port Trust by bringing to its notice of the subsequent development and if such a request is made the Chennai Port Trust shall consider the same in all seriousness. Petitioner thereafter submitted a representation on 8.8.2011 and prayed for reinstatement and for the said representation a reply was given on 9.12.2011 rejecting his request stating that the petitioner has been proceeded for producing bogus community certificate and school certificate at the time of entering into service and the said two charges