S.K.Palanisamy v. The Chief Personnel Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI And W.M.P.Nos.1731 and 1735 of 2023 S.K.Palanisamy ... Petitioner in W.P.No.1618/2023 T.Mani ... Petitioner in W.P.No.1623/2023 Vs.
1 The Chief Personnel Officer, Head Quarters Office, Personnel Branch, Chennai - 600 003.
2 The Chief Workshop Manager, Signal and Tele Communication Workshop, Southern Railway, Podanur, Coimbatore - 641 023.
3 M.Surendiran 4 C.Sasikumar 5 M.Palanisamy 6 Sundarrajan ... Respondents in both the W.Ps.
Common Prayer:
Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st and 2nd respondent to consider the representation dated 27.07.2022 and to pay the compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) to the 1/5
petitioners for malicious prosecution against the petitioners that the petitioners are not belonging to Scheduled Tribe Caste and loss of reputation of the petitioners.
For Petitioners : Mr.P.Saravanan For Respondents : Mr.J.Madhana Gopal Rao for R1 and R2 Senior Panel Counsel C O M M O N O R D E R These petitions have been filed seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 27.07.2022 and to pay the compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) to the petitioners for malicious prosecution against the petitioners that the petitioners are not belonging to Scheduled Tribe Caste and loss of reputation of the petitioners.
2.Since the issue involved in these writ petitions are interrelated, they are heard together and disposed of by way of a common order. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners belong to Scheduled Tribe Caste and they were absorbed as Skilled Artisan from open market (Scheduled Tribe), 2/5
however, the rival group gave false complaint against the petitioners as though they gave forged community certificate and thereafter the matter was referred to State Level Scrutiny Committee and the Scrutiny Committee by letter dated 20.09.2019 and 05.08.2019 respectively, held that the community certificate possessed by the petitioners is valid and genuine one. Hence, the petitioners made representations to the respondents 1 and 2 to take action against the respondents 3 to 6 and for compensation, however, there is no response. Hence, this Court may issue direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider petitioners representation and to pass appropriate orders.
4.Per contra, the learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the private respondents made complaint as against the petitioners that they gave forged community certificate, thereby, the matter was referred to State Level Scrutiny Committee inorder to find its genuineness and subsequently, the State Level Scrutiny Committee held in favour of the petitioners, for which, the petitioners are not entitled to claim compensation. 3/5
5.Whenever, a complaint is received with regard to community certificate, it is the duty caste upon the respondents 1 and 2 to refer such matters to the State Level Scrutiny Committee to find out its genuineness and the same could not be put against the respondents 1 and 2.
6.The writ petitions are disposed of. Liberty is granted to the petitioners to work out the remedy as against the private respondents in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.09.2025 pri Index: Yes/ No Speaking Order: Yes/ No NCC: Yes/ No To 1 The Chief Personnel Officer, Head Quarters Office, Personnel Branch, Chennai - 600 003.
2 The Chief Workshop Manager, Signal and Tele Communication Workshop, Southern Railway, Podanur, 4/5
Coimbatore - 641 023.
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
pri And W.M.P.Nos.1731 and 1735 of 2023 17.09.2025 5/5
6/5