THE INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK Vs. THE MEMBER & THE PRESIDING OFFICER, STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-bank has approached this Court aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Presiding Officer of the State Human Rights Commission in S.H.R.C. Case Nos. 3735 and 3490/2000/RRS dated 14.12.2000 to the extent it affects the petitioner-bank qua relief granted to one Thiru. S. Ravi, who was the permanent employee of the petitioner. It may be noted that the order is a composite one relating to a number of cases and arose out of the matter taken up by the Scheduled Tribe Employees' Welfare Association before the Commission. In so far as the facts of the case are concerned, the said S. Ravi joined the services of the petitioner-bank as a clerk on the basis of his category of SC & ST claiming to be Konda Reddy community. The appointment took place with effect from 02.05.1980 and to claim the caste reservation, a certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Tirunelveli, dated 31.08.1978 was relied upon. However, that certificate was cancelled post an enquiry by the District Collector on 06.11.1992.

(2.) In view of the cancellation of the caste certificate, the petitioner-bank issued a show cause notice dated 02.12.1992 calling for an explanation as to why the services of S. Ravi be not terminated on account of a false community certificate. However, no response was forthcoming from the said S. Ravi. In the meantime, the said S. Ravi assailed the cancellation of community certificate in W.P. No. 18777 of 1992, but the writ petition was dismissed on 15.03.2000. It is thereafter on 03.05.2000, his services were terminated in view of the decision in W.P. No. 18777 of 1992, which gave its imprimatur to the decision of the District Collector cancelling the caste certificate. The failure of S. Ravi to give any explanation on the show cause notice being issued was also one of the factors which weighed with the authorities of the petitioner-bank.

(3.) The said S. Ravi assailed the decision of the petitioner-bank by filing a declaratory suit in the Court of District Munsif, Valliyur, claiming that the Collector's report could not be the basis of the decision of the bank and interim orders were passed in his favour. However, on the petitioner-bank preferring a Civil Revision Petition, the interim orders granted by the Munsif Court were suspended on 20.07.2000.