IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA W.P. No. 8935 of 2026 and W.P.No.9636 of 2026 J.Ravi ..Petitioner Vs

1. The Director of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Panagal Maligai, 4th and 5th floor, Jennis Road, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015 2. The Collector, Ranipet District, Ranipet.

3. The Commissioner, Arakkonam Panchayat Union, Arakkonam, Ranipet District. ..Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the record of the 3rd respondent in his proceedings made in Na.Ka.A1/1283/2025, dated 01.09.2025 and quash the same and consequently, direct the 3rd respondent to reinstate the petitioner with all attendant benefits.

For Petitioner : Mr. G. Jeremiah For Respondents : Mr.P.Balathandayutham Special Government Pleader

ORDER

Challenging the termination of his services by the third respondent, the petitioner is before this Court.

2. The facts are as follows:-

2.1. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Fitter by the third respondent on daily wages on a temporary basis on 01.07.1991 and the second respondent by proceedings, identified 86 such persons, who are eligible under G.O.Ms.No.55, Panchayat Department, dated 15.06.2006, called and requested them to produce their service record along with educational qualification for regularising the part-time/daily wage workers and bring them into the regular service.

2.2. The petitioner would submit that after perusing his qualifications, by proceedings dated 08.09.2007, the second respondent had appointed him as a Night Watchman in the Nagapattinam Panchayat Union.

2.3. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted his representation seeking transfer to his parent district and by proceedings dated 07.09.2017, he was transferred from Katpadi Panchayat Union and posted as Office Assistant. Thereafter, by proceedings of the second respondent dated 19.03.2018, he was transferred to the third respondent Panchayat Union where he was serving.

2.4. The petitioner would submit that he was due to retire on

30.11.2026 and at that point of time, the respondent sought to verify his certificates. It appears that the educational certificates were sent to the District Elementary Educational Officer, Ranipet, to verify the genuineness of the school certificates. By proceedings dated 18.12.2023, the District Elementary Educational Officer, Ranipet, reported that the educational certificates produced by the petitioner would indicate that he studied in the Panchayat Union Middle School was a bogus one. Thereafter, by proceedings dated 01.09.2025, the third respondent has passed the impugned order. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. The respondents have filed the counter contending that the second respondent had forwarded the 8th Standard educational certificates of the petitioner to the District Elementary Educational Officer, Ranipet to verify its genuineness. By letter dated 03.11.2023, the third respondent had also sent a letter to the District Elementary Educational Officer, Ranipet, to examine the genuineness of the educational certificates of the petitioner.

4. By letter dated 18.12.2023, the District Elementary Educational Officer, Ranipet, had informed that the 8th Standard educational certificates produced by the petitioner is a bogus one and there were no records substantiating the same. On the basis of this information, the second respondent directed the third respondent to obtain an explanation from the petitioner for taking appropriate action. Thereafter, the third respondent sent a notice to the petitioner on 09.06.2025 to submit his explanation within a week from the date of receipt of the letter. The petitioner had submitted his explanation stating that he had only studied upto 5th Standard in Ichiputhur Panchayat Union Middle School. Even this statement appears to be false. Therefore, the petitioner had been dismissed from