Submitting a fake community certificate constitutes grave misconduct justifying dismissal from service.

ORDER

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. Sisir Kumar Ratho, Member(A))

In the instant OA, the applicant seeks the following relief:-

“To call for the records of the 2nd respondent in its No.7930/VIG/395/2015 dated 29.6.2017 as confirmed by the 1st respondent in its No.18584(890)/Per/Disc. dated 6.12.2017 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the applicant with all consequential and attendant benefits including backwages and pass such other order or orders as maybe deemed fit and thus render justice. ”

2. Brief facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, are as follows:

2.1 The Applicant belongs to the Scheduled Tribe viz, Kattunaicken Community. Based on a community certificate issued to him on 18.08.1993 by the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Thenkasi, the Applicant was appointed as Medical Assistant in the respondent factory in the year 1996. The applicant obtained another community certificate dated 30.09.1999 issued by the PA (General) to District Collector and Addl. District Magistrate (in the rank of RDO) certifying the applicant's community.

2.2 While so, the RDO, Thenkasi submitted a report to the respondents stating that the community certificate dated 18.08.1993 produced by the applicant was not issued from their office without holding any enquiry. The applicant approached the Hon. High Court in WP No.9447/2005 and by order dated 23.11.2006, the Hon. High Court remitted the matter to the RDO to conduct fresh enquiry with reasonable opportunity to the applicant. The applicant participated in the enquiry and the RDO sent the enquiry report to the respondents without marking a copy of the applicant. Based on the said report of the RDO, a chargememo dated 07.10.2015 was issued by respondents alleging that applicant had submitted a fake community certificate of the year 1993.

2.3 The applicant filed OA 1736/2015 before this Tribunal challenging the chargememo. The OA has been admitted and is pending. Meanwhile without holding proper and full fledged enquiry and without letting in oral and documentary evidences and without examining witnesses the respondent hastily concluded the enquiry. On 29.6.2017, the impugned order of removal from service was imposed on the applicant. The Applicant filed OA 1032/2017 before this Tribunal. On 07.07.2017, final order was passed by the Tribunal holding that since the remedy of appeal was available, the applicant must exhaust the same before approaching the Tribunal.

2.4 On 16.07.2017, the applicant submitted his appeal to the Appellate Authority viz., the 1st respondent. In the appeal, the applicant has highlighted how the order of dismissal was issued in a hasty manner and as to how the enquiry was held in a perfunctory manner without giving him adequate opportunity to establish his innocence. The applicant had also requested for personal hearing by the Appellate Authority viz., the 1st respondent. However, by the impugned order dated 6.12.2017, the Appellate Authority ( 1^st respondent) has dismissed the appeal without discussing or considering in depth the detailed factual and legal submissions made by the applicant. Further the opportunity of personal hearing was not also afforded to him. Being aggrieved, the applicant has filed the present OA challenging the impugned orders.

3. After notice the respondents have entered appearance through their counsel and filed their reply statement refuting all the averments made in the OA except those which are admitted on facts.

3.1 The respondents submitted the after the Hon. High Court remitting the matter to the RDO for fresh enquiry in i