S RAJU Vs. DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER THOOTHUKUDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is directed against the order of dismissal of O.A.No. 415 of 1992 dated 13.6.2002 passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. THE Original Application No. 415 of 1992 was filed challenging the order passed by the Revisional authority dated 14.1.1992, whereby the revisional authority cancelled the order passed by the appellate authority dated 5.7.1990. THE appeal was filed against the order of appointment of the writ petitioner dated 16.8.1989.

(2.) THE case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed as Grama Kavalar of Vaippar-I village, Vilathikulam Taluk in Chidambaranar district by the Tahsildar in his proceedings dated 16.8.1989. Three non-selected candidates including the fourth respondent preferred appeals before the Revenue Divisional Officer. THE appellate authority/Revenue Divisional Officer dismissed the appeals and confirmed the appointment of the writ petitioner, against which revision was filed by the non-selected candidates. THE revisional authority/District Revenue Officer exercising the powers under Rule 10 of the Tamil Nadu Village Servants Rules, 1980 has conducted the enquiry with regard to the certificate furnished by the petitioner, as the fourth respondent has stated that the educational Certificate produced by the petitioner is false, based on the letter obtained from the Headmaster that the certificate produced by the writ petitioner was not issued by the School concerned. THE revisional authority, after conducting a fresh test to all the candidates who have appeared, cancelled the appointment of the writ petitioner and appointed the fourth respondent as Grama Kavalar. Challenging the order passed by the revisional authority, the petitioner approached the Tribunal. THE Tribunal initially granted stay of the operation of the order dated 14.1.1992 passed by the revisional authority/District Revenue Officer, on 28.1.1992. Finally, the Tribunal dismissed the Original Application by an order dated 13.6.1992, against which the present writ petition is filed. THE petitioner obtained an order of stay from this Court on 1.7.1992, which was subsequently made absolute by an order dated 12.9.2002, on the vacate stay petition filed by the fourth respondent. Now the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

(3.) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances of the case, it is revealed that the appointing authority conducted the test and on verification of the records satisfied himself that the petitioner is possessed of the required qualification of reading and writing and appointed the petitioner. His appointment was confirmed by the appellate authority/the Revenue Divisional Officer. But, however, the revisional authority, after collecting the materials from the Headmaster, who is alleged to have issued the certificate, set aside the order of appointment of the writ petitioner but appointed the fourth respondent.