V.Ragavi v. K.Deepa

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED:

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR V.Ragavi Petitioner Vs K.Deepa, Revenue Divisional Officer Tiruttani, Thiruvallur District Respondents Prayer:- This Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the Respondent for the wilful disobedience of the order dated of this Court, dated 13.022024, passed in WP.No.34881 of 2023, under the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act. For Petitioners :

Mr.S.Doraiswamy V.Elangovan For Respondents :

Mr.G.Nanmaran, SGP

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.)

1. This Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the Respondent for the wilful disobedience of the order dated of this Court, dated 13.022024, passed in WP.No.34881 of 2023, under the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act.

2. This Court heard the learned counsel on either side.

3. By the impugned order made in the above Writ Petition, a direction was 1/5

issued to the Respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer to issue a Community Certificate to the Petitioner in the prescribed format within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. Since the said direction was not complied with, within the specified time, this Contempt Petition has been filed. At the time of admission, at the request of the learned Additional Advocate General, the matter was ordered to be posted today for reporting compliance of the impugned order.

4. Today, a copy of the Form of Caste Certificate, dated 03.04.2024, issued in favour of the Petitioner, is produced before this Court. However, the grievance of the Petitioner is that though the said certificate was issued in the prescribed format in favour of the Petitioner, the Revenue Divisional Officer, who has issued the certificate, has also made a clause (3) under the heading "NOTE" to the effect that the Certificate issued is subjected to review and verification by the State Level Scrutiny Committee.

5. On a perusal of the said Form of Caste Certificate, this Court is unable to find any irregularity in issuing the said certificate, by making the said clause under the head "NOTE". Even without such a "Note", the certificate issued to the Petitioner can be the subject matter of review and verification by the State Level Scrutiny Committee, in view of the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court reported 1994 6 SCC 241 (Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, wherein it is indicated that the 2/5

certificates issued are to be scrutinised and verified by a Scrutiny Committee and that an employee or a candidate, who was issued with such a certificate, has to subject the same to verification by the Competent Scrutiny Committee, by applying at least six months in advance before seeking appointment to a post or admission into an educational Institution. Hence, this Court is of the view that there is no disobedience of the impugned order of this Court on the part of the Respondent/ Revenue Divisional Officer, in issuing such a certificate with a note and accordingly, this Contempt Petition is liable to be closed. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court in case the certificate issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer is not accepted by the Employer.

6. With the above observations, this Contempt Petition is closed. No costs. (S.S.S.R.J.) & (N.S.J.) Index:Yes/No Web:Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking Srcm To K.Deepa, Revenue Divisional Officer Tiruttani, Thiruvallur District 3/5

S.S.SUNDAR, J.

and N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

Srcm 4/5

5/5