M RAMAMURTHY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the proceedings of the Second respondent dated 16. 5. 86, the petitioner has approached this court for quashing the same on various grounds.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder:- He is a permanent resident of Padalayar Kulam Village , nanguneri Taluk of Tirunelveli District. He belongs to Sholaga community. In the year 1975, he applied for the post of Trainee Technician in the Telephone department and on 23. 4. 75 he was appointed as a Trainee Technician. On 24. 4. 76 he was appointed as a Technician in the Department of Telephones, Pattukottai. He had submitted a certificate given by the Tahsildar, Nanguneri dated 26. 7. 7 4 to the effect that he belongs to Hindu Sholaga community which is recognised as a Scheduled Tribe. It is stated that while he was working as Transmission assistant in the Telephone Exchange, Kovilpatti, due to some petitions given against him, the genuineness of the community certificate produced by him was referred by the Divisional Engineer (Telegraphs) Tuticorin to the Collector, tirunelveli for field verification. Pursuant to the said reference an enquiry was conducted by the Sub-Collector, Cheranmahadevi, the third respondent herein. He appeared before the third respondent and produced his S. S. L. C. book to show that he belongs to Sholaga community. He also produced a certificate issued to his father by the Headmaster of T. D. T. A. Schools, Dhonavur Circle dated 27. 10. 1954 which also shows that his grandfather's name was Shanmugam Sholaga. Apart from this, he also produced the community certificate issued by the Tahsildar. He also produced two sale deeds executed in the year 1981 and 1985 in favour of his father wherein also the term sholaga appears. THE enquiry was completed in the year 1985 itself. But the order passed thereon by the third respondent was not communicated to him. However, he received a chargesheet dated 27. 1. 90 issued by the Divisional engineer, Telecommunications, Government of India, Tuticorin, wherein it is stated that he had furnished false information and suppressed factual information in the application for recruitment to the post of Technician. THE order of the second respondent dated 16. 5. 1986 stating that he does not belong to Sholaga community has been communicated to him for the first time only along with the charge memo dated 27. 1. 90. In such circumstances, having no other remedy, he has approached this court by way of the present writ petition.

(3.) I have carefully considered the rival submissions.