C KAVITHA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will govern W.A. No. 1731 of 2000 and W.P. No. 17720 of 2000. The subject of both these proceedings is more or the less identical and both have been filed by the same petitioner. The following factual panorama will help to understand the controversy involved : Petitioner is an employee of the Life Insurance Corporation of India, serving as "Stenographer". She joined this post on 18-7-1991. THIS was a post reserved for the "Scheduled Tribe" candidates. At the time she joined the post, it was on the basis of a community certificate dated 12-4-1990, issued by the Tahsildar, Mylapore-Triplicane Taluk, Chennai. According to the said certificate, the petitioner belonged to "HINDU-KURUMANS", which is a Scheduled Tribe. It so happened that by letter dated 19-4-1995, that is almost about four years after the joining, the Life Insurance Corporation directed the petitioner to produce a community certificate duly signed by a Revenue Divisional Officer.

(2.) IT is an admitted position that the State of Tamil Nadu had withdrawn from all the Tahsildars the authority to issue community certificates, granting the status of "Scheduled Tribe", with effect from 11-11-1989. Therefore, any community certificate issued by the Tahsildar after 11-11-1989 did not amount to a valid certificate and, perhaps, because of this the petitioner was directed to produce the community certificate duly signed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, who was the "only authority" to grant such certificate.

(3.) THE learned counsel very earnestly argues that the power of cancelling the community certificate once granted was that of the State Level Scrutiny Committee. THE argument is completely incorrect as it has been pointed out that it is an admitted position that there is a Government Order in existence whereunder, it is specifically declared that after 11-11-1989, Tahsildar would have no power to issue any community certificate. We fail to follow as to why the concerned authorities could not cancel the certificate issued by an officer, who had no authority to do so and where was the need for formation of a Committee for that purpose. It was plain and simple that the said certificate was issued by the Tahsildar on 12-4-1990 and it is an admitted position that the Tahsildar did not have any such power to issue any such certificate after 11-11-1989. THErefore, on the face of it itself, the certificate must go and any effort on the part of the concerned authorities could not be stalled by finding faults with the Government Order forming the District Vigilance Committee.