IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 03.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

and WMP.Nos.2045 & 2046 of 2023

S.Manikandan S/o.Solaiappan

Formerly Assistant

Agriculture Department

Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009. ... Petitioner

Vs

1.The Secretary to Government

Agriculture and Farmers Welfare (OP.2) Department

Fort St.George, Chennai – 9.

2.The Deputy Secretary to Government

Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department

Fort St.George, Chennai – 9. ... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent in connection with the impugned order passed by him in G.O.(D) No.287, Agriculture & Farmer Welfare (OP.2) Department dated 01/12/2022, quash the same and direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential service and monetary benefits and grant such

other relief as this Court deem fit in the circumstances of the case.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Muthappan For Respondents : Mr.P.Anand Kumar Government Advocate for R1 & R2

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned order passed by the second respondent in G.O.(D) No.287 Agriculture and Farmer Welfare (OP.2) Department, dated 01.12.2022, and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential service and monetary benefits.

2. The petitioner's father who served as Section Officer in the Secretariat, had died on 04.04.2005. The petitioner made a request seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. His application was considered and based on the educational qualifications possessed by the petitioner, he was appointed as Assistant in the Tamil Nadu Secretariat Service, on 27.02.2007. He was kept under probation for a period of two years. During this period, he had passed the Departmental Examinations. Since his appointment was exclusively within the purview of the Service Commission, for regularizing his services, necessary concurrence have to be obtained from the concerned educational authorities, for which purpose, his certificates were sent to the Directorate of School Education, Chennai, Director of Government Education, and University of Madras. On verification of the mark sheets, the Secretary, Department of Government Education found there was a mismatch of records and hence, directed the respondent-Department to sent the original certificates of the petitioner.

3. The petitioner was unable to produce the mark sheets as the same was destroyed by his wife on account of family dispute and the same was informed to the respondents vide his reply dated 07.12.2020. Thereafter, there was no enquiry on this issue nor any memo was issued to the petitioner, and the petitioner has been under probation till date.

4. Be that as it may, the second respondent issued the impugned order dated 01.12.2022, terminating the services of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner's HSC (+2) mark sheet was found to be forged. The impugned order came to be passed following the Rule 17(b) 17(d)(iv) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies (D&A) Rules.

5. The petitioner would contend that since he had successfully completed his probation period, serving in the respondent-Department for more than 14 years, the impugned order came to be passed without issuing any show cause notice to him, is in total violation of principles of natural justice. His contention is that even assuming that he had submitted a forged certificate, the respondents ought to have followed the procedures contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies (D&A) Rules, by initiating charge memo proceedings and conducting an enquiry, and if he was found proved of charges, then the respondents can impose a punishment. But the respondents have failed to do so and had terminated the petitioner from services. Thus, they had violated the settled procedure established under law for termination of service of an indivi