P.Ayyappan v. The Chairman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.12.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU and THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA and W.M.P.No. 34836 of 2023 P. Ayyappan ..Petitioner Vs.
The Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-II, Additional Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare (CV2) Department, Secretariat Chennai-9. ..Respondent Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent made in Impugned proceedings No.12268/CV-2(2)/2012-14 dated 21.11.2023 and quash the same and consequently refrain the respondent from making verification into the petitioner's community after retirement. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Naganathan For Respondent : Mrs. R.L.Karthika for Government Advocate Page No:1/7
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by J.Nisha Banu,J.) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging impugned proceeding No.12268/CV-2(2)/2012-14 dated 21.11.2023 and consequently refrain the respondent from making verification into the petitioner's community after retirement.
2. The case of the petitioner is that his family belongs to Konda Reddy community which is classified as a Scheduled Tribe and he was issued with such community certificate by the Tahsildar, Nanguneri on 02.09.1973. His close relatives including his grandfather Muthusamy and his parents had been living in Samuharengapuram village, Nanguneri Taluk, Tirunelveli during 1950. The petitioner was appointed in the Indian Bank and posted at Puthunagaram Branch, Kerala on 06.04.1979 and after completing 35 years of unblemished service, he was given promotion up to the level of Manager and reached superannuation on 30.06.2013. He was sanctioned with pension, gratuity and other admissible terminal benefits and he is presently 71 years Page No:2/7
old.
3. According to the petitioner, he got retired from service on 30.06.2013 and the respondent issued a impugned notice No.12268/CV2(2)/2012-14 dated 21.11.2023 to the petitioner for an enquiry to be held on 08.01.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner served in the bank for 35 years and attained superannuation. As of now, no purpose will be served in verifying the community certificate of the petitioner. The petitioner is now 71 years old and at this stage, verification of his community status is uncalled for.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner filed an undertaking affidavit of the petitioner before this Court, in which, paragraph No.6 reads as under:- "I submit that I filed a W.P.No.34829 of 2023 before this Hon'ble Court seeking to quash the impugned order. I Page No:3/7
got retired from service in way back in the year 2013 and i have been suffering continuously for all these periods. Therefore, I hereby sincerely given an undertaking that I shall not utilize my ST Community Certificate dated 02.09.1973 for myself or my children at any point of time in future."
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.
6. It is seen from the records that the petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2013. But the respondent issued impugned notice dated 21.11.2023 to the petitioner. At this stage, verification of his community status is uncalled for. The Government of India have issued guidelines periodically mandating all employers and authorities to undertake verification at the earliest point of time preferably at the time of one's entry into service. Page No:4/7
7. It is pertinent to point out that the Hon'ble Apex Court and various High Courts have time and again stressed that verification after retirement is a wasteful exercise and would be purely academic. In similar circumstances, in SLP(C) No.24458/2019 dated 03.03.2023, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as follows:
"It is submitted that the respondent No.1 who served in the Railways has superannuated on 28.02.2022 and therefore, the exercise in this case would largely be academic on the aspect of whether she belonged to the claimed Scheduled Tribe category.
Considering the above, we deem it is appropriate to order for closure of the proceedings.
Accordingly, the Special leave Petition stands disposed of."
8. In the light of the above decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, recording the undertaking affidavit filed by the petitioner, we are inclined to set aside the impugned notice dated 21.11.2023. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. The impugned notice dated Page No:5/7
21.11.2023 is quashed. The employer Bank shall pay all the terminal benefits, if any due to the petitioner forthwith. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(J.N.B.,J.) (N.M.,J.) 14.12.2023 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No msv To The Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-II, Additional Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare (CV2) Department, Secretariat Chennai-9.
Page No:6/7
J.NISHA BANU,J.
And N.Mala,J.
msv and W.M.P.No. 34836 of 2023 14.12.2023 Page No:7/7