R.MARIAMMAL Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY/SPECIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition is filed for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent in Proceedings No.3057/A2/2012, dated 11.7.2012 and to quash the same in so far as it directs the appointment of the petitioner only from the date of joining pursuant to the impugned order ignoring the service rendered by her from 1994-2003 and to direct the respondent, to issue an order of reinstatement with effect from 26-05-2003 (date of removal from service) and to fix her pay in the revised pay band of Rs.5200-20200 + Grade Pay of Rs.2800, with reference to the pay which she would have drawn if she had continued in service, without any break, due to the removal from service.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Weaving Instructor Grade-I on 16.02.1994 in the Government Juvenile Home, Mallipudur, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudunagar District. The employment was made through the Employment Exchange. The petitioner had passed the Lower Grade Examination in Handloom Weaving in the Government Technical Examination, held in May, 1984. Her appointment was made, after due verification of all certificates. A charge memo, dated 18.03.2002, was issued to her, stating that the qualification required for being appointed as a Weaving Instructor Grade-I, is a National Trade Certificate awarded by the National Council for Vocational Training and the qualification possessed by the petitioner, namely passing of the Lower Grade Examination in Handloom Weaving in the Government Technical Examination, is not equivalent to the National Trade Certificate and therefore the petitioner was not entitled to be appointed as a Weaving Instructor Grade - I.

(3.) Thereafter, the petitioner was removed from service on 26.05.2003. The order of removal was challenged by filing W.P.No.940 of 2006. This Court by an order dated 23.03.2011, found that there was no suppression by the petitioner and that the petitioner was appointed only after due verification of all certificates. This Court was of the view that had the petitioner not been given an appointment, she would have got the sponsorship by the concerned employment exchange for appointment to the post of Weaving Instructor Grade-II, to which she was qualified or for any other suitable post for which she had the relevant educational qualification. This Court found that due to delay on the part of the respondent, the petitioner had crossed the maximum age limit, prescribed for government employment and therefore she has lost all employment opportunities. This Court passed the following directions:-