Madras High Court
N. Vasugi vs The Chairman on 5 June, 2025
Author: J.Nisha Banu
Bench: J. Nisha Banu
WP No. 20002 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05-06-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
WP No. 20002 of 2025
and W.M.P.No.22553 of 2025
1. N. Vasugi
W/o.A.Srinivasan, No.11/1, 4g,
Chinnappan Street, Valkuruchi Road,
Kolatur Salem District.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Chairman
State Level Scrutiny Committee-III and
Additional Secretary to Government
Adi Dravidar And Tribal Welfare (CV-
6) Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police
SC/ST Vigilance Cell, Salem Division,
District Collector Office Complex,
Salem-1.
Respondent(s)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
WP No. 20002 of 2025
PRAYER
The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the
issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2 nd
respondent in its File No.21/DSP/ SC/ ST Vigilance Cell/ Salem Region/ 2025
dated 14.03.2025 and quash the same and consequently refrain the respondents
from conducting verification into the petitioners caste status, especially as she
has retired in May 2024.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.V. Vijay Shankar
For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Kumaravel
Additional Government Pleader
-----
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by J.NISHA BANU, J.)
By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal
at the stage of admission itself.
2. The present Writ Petition is filed, for the issuance of a Writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the second respondent in its
File No.21/DSP/ SC/ ST Vigilance Cell/ Salem Region/ 2025 dated 14.03.2025
and quash the same and consequently refrain the respondents from conducting
verification into the petitioner's caste status, especially as she has retired in May
2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
3. The case of the petitioner is that she belongs to the Konda Reddis
Community, which is classified as Scheduled Tribe and was issued with a
Community Certificate on 14.09.1978. The petitioner was appointed as Clerk in
the State Bank of India in the year 1983 and her services were confirmed with
effect from 1984 and she retired from service on 31.05.2024. The Bank had
sanctioned pension and all other admissible terminal benefits to the petitioner.
While so, on 19.03.2025, the second respondent has issued a notice to the
petitioner to appear for enquiry regarding genuinity of her community
certificate. Immediately, she made objections informing that she had retired
from service and that the enquiry need not be required.
4. It is the further case of the petitioner that even after filing objections
before the second respondent, the second respondent is continuously harassing
the petitioner by insisting that she must appear for verification. Hence, the
petitioner is constrained to approach this Court by filing the present Writ
Petition.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional
Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the materials
available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
6. It is seen from the records that the petitioner joined the services of the
State Bank of India as early as in 1983 and retired from service on 31.05.2024.
Therefore, questioning her community certificate, after her retirement is
uncalled for.
7. The Apex Court in the case of R.Sundaram vs. The Tamil Nadu State
Level Scrutiny Committee and Others dated 17.03.2023, in Paragraph No.16
held as follows:-
“16. It has been explicitly stated by this court that the
exercise of verification of community certificate must be
completed expeditiously. In the present case, however, as has been
mentioned above, there has been an inordinate and unexplained
delay of 19 years, an amount of time which cannot be fathomed,
within the ambit of 'reasonable time'.”
8. In yet another case, the Supreme Court in the case of SLP(C)
No.24458/2019 dated 03.03.2023, was pleased to hold as under:
“It is submitted that the respondent No.1 who served in the
Railways has superannuated on 28.02.2022 and therefore, the
exercise in this case would largely be academic on the aspect of
whether she belonged to the claimed Scheduled Tribe category.
Considering the above, we deem it is appropriate to order for
closure of the proceedings. Accordingly, the Special
leave Petition stands disposed of.”
9. The decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Kumari
Madhuri Patil vs. Additional Commissioner, reported in 1995 AIR 94 weighs
much importance in the case on hand, had elaborately dealt with the issue of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
community certificate and observed that as per Article 15(4) of the Constitution
of India, it is for the State to make special provisions for advancement of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Further, it was observed that in the
light of Article 16(1), equality of opportunity to all citizens in matters of
appointments to an office or a post under the Union or a State Government or
public undertakings etc., should be ensured. For that purpose, Article 16(4)
empowers the State to make provisions for reservation of appointments or posts
in favour of classes of citizens not adequately represented in the services under
the State. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the said judgment while issuing
certain guidelines, insisted that the community certificate in respect of SC/ST
should be scrutinised at the earliest. For the sake of convenience, relevant
paragraphs of the judgment are reproduced below:
“It is, therefore, necessary that the certificates issued are
scrutinised at the earliest and with utmost expedition and
promptitude. For that purpose, it is necessary to streamline the
procedure for the issuance of social status certificates, their
scrutiny and their approval, which may be the following:
1. The application for grant of social status
certificate shall be made to the Revenue Sub-Divisional
Officer and Deputy Collector or Deputy Commissioner
and the certificate shall be issued by such officer rather
than at the Officer, Taluk or Mandal level.
2. The parent, guardian or the candidate, as the case
may be, shall file an affidavit duly sworn and attested by a
competent gazetted officer or non-gazetted officer with
particulars of castes and sub-castes, tribe, tribal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
community, parts or groups of tribes or tribal
communities, the place from which he originally hails
from and other particulars as may be prescribed by the
Directorate concerned.
3. Application for verification of the caste
certificate by the Scrutiny Committee shall be filed at
least six months in advance before seeking admission into
educational institution or an appointment to a post.
4. All the State Governments shall constitute a
Committee of three officers, namely, (1) an Additional or
Joint Secretary or any officer higher in rank of the
Director of the department concerned, (11) the Director,
Social Welfare/Tribal Welfare/Backward Class Welfare, as
the case may be, and (III) in the case of Scheduled Castes
another officer who has intimate knowledge in the
verification and issuance of the social status certificates.
In the case of the Scheduled Tribes, the Research Officer
who has intimate knowledge in identifying the tribes, tribal
communities, parts of or groups of tribes or tribal communities.
5. Each Directorate should constitute a vigilance cell
consisting of Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police in over-all
charge and such number of Police Inspectors to investigate into the
social status claims. The Inspector would go to the local place of
residence and original place from which the candidate hails and
usually resides or in case of migration to the town or city, the place
from which he originally hailed from. The vigilance officer should
personally verify and collect all the facts of the social status
claimed by the candidate or the parent or guardian, as the case may
be. He should also examine the school records, birth registration, if
any. He should also examine the parent, guardian or the candidate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
in relation to their caste etc. or such other persons who have
knowledge of the social status of the candidate and then submit a
report to the Directorate together with all particulars as envisaged
in the pro forma, in particular, of the Scheduled Tribes relating to
their peculiar anthropological and ethnological traits, deity, rituals,
customs, mode of marriage, death ceremonies, method of burial of
dead bodies etc. by the castes or tribes or tribal communities
concerned etc.
6. The Director concerned, on receipt of the report from the
vigilance officer if he found the claim for social status to be "not
genuine" or 'doubtful' or spurious or falsely or wrongly claimed,
the Director concerned should issue show-cause notice supplying a
copy of the report of the vigilance officer to the candidate by a
registered post with acknowledgement due or through the head of
the educational institution concerned in which the candidate is
studying or employed. The notice should indicate that the
representation or reply, if any, would be made within two weeks
from the date of the receipt of the notice and in no case on request
not more than 30 days from the date of the receipt of the notice.”
10. Keeping in mind the above judgment of the Apex Court, an Office
Memorandum was issued on 24.12.2020 by the Joint Secretary, Lok Sabha
Secretariat. The relevant portions of the Office Memorandum are extracted
hereunder:
“...It is pertinent to mention that the
Departments/Banks/PSUs have not adhered to the above
mentioned guidelines of DoP&T and CVC and also it is not in
conformity with the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment delivered
vide Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. Addl. Commissioner in 1995 AIR
94, 1994 SSC (6) 241 Order dated 02.09.1994 since this judgment
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
can only be implemented in prospective.
2. Here, it is pertinent to bring to your notice DoP&T OM
no.230/08/2005-AVD II dated 25.05.2005, which clearly states the
following:-
“Government has, therefore decided that a detailed
verification of all such certificates produced before various
appointing authorities since 1995 be carried. The CVOs are
requested to initiate this task by collecting the details of all
those who had been appointed in the Ministries/Departments
or agencies including CPSUs with which they are
concerned, since 1995 on the strength of ST certificates.
2. Keeping in view the above mentioned facts, it is requested
that the concerned State Level Scrutiny Committee be directed to
verify the ST caste certificates of only those employees who were
appointed after the year 1995 and the process of verification
should be completed within two months. The Action Taken Report
in this regard may be please be forwarded to this Secretariat at the
earliest but not later than 18.02.2021 so that the same may be
placed before the Committee.”
11. The above referred Office Memorandum makes it very clear that
community certificates of employees, who were inducted into Government
Service after 1995 can alone be subjected for scrutiny / verification. To be more
precise, it is incumbent on the employers / authorities to conduct verifications
ideally at the time of an employee's entry into service, so as to ensure the
accuracy and integrity of personnel records.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
12. In furtherance thereof, the Government of India, Ministry of
Personnel, PG & Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training issued
instructions dated 21.10.2022 to all State / UT Governments, insisting upon the
need for timely verification of Caste / Community certificates, indicating as
follows:
“3. In this regard, it is reiterated that the responsibility for
the issue and verification of Caste Certificate lies with the
concerned State / UT Government. The Hon'ble Supreme Court,
vide its order dated 02.09.1994 in the matter of Kumari Madhuri
Patil vs. Addl. Commissioner, has laid down the detailed
guidelines for effective verification of the Caste Certificates of the
employees by the State Government, so that no person, on the
basis of fake caste certificate, may secure employment wrongfully
in the Government.”
13. On a reading of the aforesaid instructions, it is apparent that the
Government of India is very keen in curbing the wrongful entry of an employee
in the Government Service based on the fake community certificate and issued
instructions to all State / UT Governments for verification of the community
certificates at the earliest point of time.
14. In an another Office Memorandum dated 30.11.2021, issued by the
Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions, Department of
Pension & Pensioner's Welfare strictly instructed concerned Departments that
unless departmental or judicial proceedings are pending against a retired
employee, the pensionary / retirement benefits due to the retiring employee
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
should not be withheld or delay on the ground of pendency of verification of
caste certificate.
15. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew our attention to the
Government Order dated 15.10.2012 issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu,
constituting a District Level Vigilance Committee and State Level Scrutiny
Committee to verify the genuineness of the community certificates. Vigilance
Cells at Chennai, Salem, Trichy and Madurai were also formed to verify the
community status and submit a report to the Committee. In the Government
Order, the functions of the Vigilance Cells have been enumerated and a time
frame has also been fixed for completion of enquiry, which reads as follows:
“vii) The inquiry should be completed as expeditiously as
possible preferably by day to day proceedings within such period
not exceeding two months. If after inquiry, the competent
committee finds the claim to be false or spurious, they should pass
an order cancelling the certificate issued and confiscate the same.
It should communicate within one month from the date of the
conclusion of the proceedings the result of enquiry to the parent /
guardian and the applicant.”
16. In the light of various judgments of the Supreme Court and also the
guidelines / instructions / GO issued by both Government of India and State
Government, from time to time, we are of the view that the respondent cannot
keep the matter pending for months / years together in the garb of verification of
community certificates, especially when there is a specific time frame fixed for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
completion of such verification.
17. Therefore, the verification of the petitioner's community certificate at
this belated stage will be a futile exercise and is not in consonance with the
judgment of the Supreme Court and guidelines issued by the Government.
Hence, we have no other option, but to set aside the impugned proceedings.
18. The learned counsel for the petitioner would also state that the
petitioner at this age is finding difficult to appear for enquiry before the officials
and therefore, the petitioner would state that she is willing to surrender her
community certificate and she will not claim concessions to her children on the
basis of her community certificate.
19. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned letter in File
No.21/DSP/SC/ST Vigilance Cell/ Salem Region/2025, dated 14.03.2025 of the
second respondent is hereby set aside and. The petitioner shall surrender her
community certificate (if not already surrendered) to the concerned Officials on
due acknowledgment. The affidavit filed by the petitioner dated 04.06.2025
undertaking that she will not make any claim that she belongs to Konda
Reddis Community and will surrender the community certificate issued is
hereby recorded. In case, any application for issuance of community certificate
is made by the son of the petitioner in future for the purpose of education,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
employment, etc., an independent enquiry can be conducted by following due
process of law and a decision shall be taken in respect of issuance of community
certificate within two months from the date of receipt of application, if any
made, bearing in mind the judgment of the Supreme Court / guidelines and the
Government Order issued by the State Government dated 15.10.2012 (referred
to supra). No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(J.NISHA BANU J.) (M.JOTHIRAMAN J.)
05-06-2025
ASI
To
1.The Chairman
State Level Scrutiny Committee-III and
Additional Secretary To Government
Adi Dravidar And Tribal Welfare
(CV-6) Department,
Secretariat, Chennai-9.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police
SC/ST Vigilance Cell, Salem Division,
District Collector Office Complex,
Salem-1.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
J.NISHA BANU J.
AND
M.JOTHIRAMAN J.
ASI
05-06-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/06/2025 07:35:06 pm )
