Repeated verification of community certificates for employees appointed before 1996 is impermissible unless fraud or procedural irregularities are established.

ORDER :

(M.S. RAMESH, J.)

The present Writ Petition is filed, challenging the impugned order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings No.21000/CVIII/2007-13, dated 24.05.2019.

2. The petitioner herein was issued with a community certificate dated 28.04.1993, certifying that she belongs to Hindu Konda Reddis community, which is recognized as a Scheduled Tribe. On the strength of her community certificate, she was appointed in the Income Tax Department in the year 1995. Thereafter, the genuinity of her community certificate was enquired into by the Sub Collector, Periyakulam and through a report dated 05.11.1995, her community certificate was held to be genuine.

3. Even after the verification of her community status, the District Collector, Virudhunagar initiated an enquiry into the genuinity of her certificate, which initiation of the proceedings was quashed by this Court through orders dated 01.08.2005 passed in W.P.No.13543 of 1999 on the ground that the District Collector has no jurisdiction for conducting such a verification. Thereafter, similar verification proceedings were initiated by the District Collector of Theni District, which was also quashed through orders passed in W.P.(MD).No.7009 of 2007 dated 04.10.2007 on the ground of incompetency of the authority. Once again, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam had initiated further enquiry for community verification, which was closed after the petitioner had given a reply, enclosing the details of her family background, employment of her father in the Public Works Department, community certificates of her father and relatives, school records evidencing her community as Konda Reddis and other documentary evidences.

4. However, in view of the observations made by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the orders passed in W.P.(MD).No.7009 of 2007 dated 04.10.2007, the matter was referred to the three member State Level Committee/first respondent herein. Through the impugned order dated24.05.2019, the State Level Scrutiny Committee had placed reliance on the reports of the Sub Collector, Periyakulam, Vigilance Cell, Theni and the report of the Anthropologist and had come to the conclusion that the petitioner herein, does not belong to Konda Reddis Scheduled Tribe community and directed the District Collector, Madurai to confiscate her community certificate. This order is put under challenge in this Writ Petition.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Committee had no authority to verify the genuineness of the petitioner's community status since such verification was already done in the year 1995 itself and held as genuine and further verification is impermissible in view of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as well as the Division Benches of this Court. He further submitted that the Service Register of the petitioner's father in the year 1959 evidences that he belongs to Hindu Konda Reddis community and so also, the certificates of his close blood relatives, which factors have not been considered by the Committee. He also placed reliance on the decisions of this Court for the proposition that the verification of the caste certificates of the employees appointed prior to 1996, cannot be done.

6. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent, drew our attention to the impugned order and submitted that the procedure for verification of the Scheduled Tribe community certificate by the State Level Scrutiny Committee, was strictly followed as provided under the 'Manual on Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes Community Certificates - Issuance and Verification'. According to him, the Committee had fully scrutinized the reports given by the Sub Collector, Periyakulam and Vigilance Cell, as well as the report of the Anthropologist and after considering the reply given by the petitioner to the show cause notice, had rightly concluded that her community certificate was incorrect and therefore, the Writ Petiti