Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Madras High Court

State Of Tamil Nadu vs Kanimozhi on 8 July, 2021

Author: Pushpa Sathyanarayana

Bench: Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Krishnan Ramasamy

                                                                        W.A.No.411 of 2021 and
                                                                        C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED: 08.07.2021

                                                      CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
                                                    and
                              THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

                                               W.A.No.411 of 2021 and
                                               C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021

                     1.State of Tamil Nadu
                       Rep. by its Secretary to Government
                       Tamil Nadu School Education Department
                       Secretariat, Fort St. George
                       Chennai - 600 009

                     2.The Joint Director
                       Directorate of School Education
                       DPI Complex, College Road
                       Chennai - 600 006

                     3.The Chief Educational Officer
                       Nagapattinam
                       Nagapattinam District                                 ... Appellants

                                                        Vs.

                     Kanimozhi                                               ...Respondent


                     PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
                     against the order dated 22.10.2020 passed in W.P. No.15539 of
                     2020.
                                     For Petitioner     : Mr.R.Neelakandan
                                                          State Government Counsel

                                     For Respondent     : Mr.V.Elangovan



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                     Page 1/8
                                                                       W.A.No.411 of 2021 and
                                                                       C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021

                                                      JUDGMENT

PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.

The above writ appeal is filed by the State challenging the order of the writ court dated 22.10.2020 passed in W.P. No.15339 of 2020.

2. The sole respondent is a destitute widow, having lost her husband at the young age of 22 years, left with two minor children. She had passed her SSLC in the year 2007 and could not continue her further studies and was given in marriage and has become a destitute widow as on date.

3. Pursuant to the Notification issued by the appellants herein/respondents dated 22.04.2015 calling for applications for appointment to the post of Lab Assistants in Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary Schools, the writ petitioner had applied for the same under the category 'destitute widow'. The application was to be made on-line. There was a written examination on 31.05.2015, in which the petitioner emerged successful and was called for certificate verification by the third appellant on 10.04.2017. The petitioner had also produced all the necessary certificates excepting https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page 2/8 W.A.No.411 of 2021 and C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021 the certificate of destitute widow. She has categorically stated that she had applied for the said certificate in August 2016 before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nagapattinam and the same was issued to her only on 23.05.2017, after almost, an year. Therefore, she could not produce the Destitute Widow Certificate issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer on the date of verification i.e. 10.04.2017. It was stated that the appellants assured that she could produce it in future, as the same has to be issued by the authorities and her appointment would be considered positively. After she received the said certificate from the Revenue Divisional Officer on 23.05.2017, she immediately reached the same to the third appellant and requested him to consider her appointment. The third appellant had rejected her claim as the Destitute Widow Certificate was produced by her belatedly beyond the date fixed for certificate verification, by his order dated 19.08.2020.

4. It is not in dispute that the writ petitioner is a destitute widow and she is qualified to be appointed as a Lab Assistant, as she has cleared the examination also. For mere production of the certificate, which is to be issued by the Government and which is not in her control, she cannot be thrown out by not being given an appointment. Therefore, the learned single Judge had considered https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page 3/8 W.A.No.411 of 2021 and C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021 her plight and had directed the authorities to issue the order of appointment as Lab Assistant within a period of thirty days, which is now assailed in the appeal.

5. In this regard reliance may be usefully placed on a decision of the Division Bench of this court in Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission vs. M.Chitra and another reported in 2010 (2) MLJ 146. In that case, there was a delay in issuing the certificate by the competent authority. In the said judgment, the Division Bench at paragraph 20 held as under:

" 20. It is true that the first respondent did not produce the Community Certificate before the provisional list of selected candidates was finalized. On this score, in normal course, applying the principles stated above, this Court would have held that the claim of the first respondent for consideration under the reserved quota for Scheduled Tribe should be rejected. But, we do not propose to do so, for the simple reason, as we have elaborately narrated above that the first respondent cannot be blamed for the belated issuance of Community Certificate. As we have already stated, the request of the first respondent for issuance of Community Certificate was pending before the Revenue Divisional Officer for more than a decade.
                                   It     is     only     in   these        special    and    peculiar

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                     Page 4/8
                                                                                  W.A.No.411 of 2021 and
                                                                                  C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021

circumstances, we are inclined to sustain the Order of the learned Single Judge."

6. In C.Stella Mary vs. Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission reported in (2009) 6 MLJ 1211, a learned single Judge of this court at paragraphs 11 and 12, held as under:

" 11. Here, admittedly, the application was submitted in time along with a covering letter requesting to permit the petitioner to submit the destitute widow certificate as soon as it is received from the competent authority. Simply because such certificate was not submitted along with the application, it would not be in the interest of justice to reject her claim. The object of creating reservation to Destitute Widow is only to help such widows to rescue them from destitution. On a technical ground, like the one which was taken in the impugned order, if such a claim is rejected, I am sure, it will certainly defeat the very object of such reservation.
12. The crucial factor to be considered in such a case, is whether on the crucial date viz., on the date of making application, the candidate was a destitute widow or not. Production of certificate is only to prove the said fact. Whether it is produced along with the application or some time later, is immaterial. If such a certificate is produced before the list of candidates is finalised for interview, in my considered opinion, that would serve the purpose https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page 5/8 W.A.No.411 of 2021 and C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021 and would not prejudice the cause of the other candidates."

7. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the State submitted that the respondent had applied for the post of Lab Assistant in the Government School in Maraikanchavady and that the said post was already filled up with a candidate from destitute widow category. He also further stated that the Lab Assistant post in 'OC category' is not yet filled up, as the person selected for the same has not reported.

8. The writ petitioner/respondent is a resident of Maraikanchavady, Thittacherry, Nagapattinam Taluk. Pursuant to our directions issued to the Government Pleader to verify any other vacancy of Lab Assistant post in Nagapattinam District, which would be nearer to the writ petitioner, the list of schools in Nagapattinam District, where the post of Lab Assistants are vacant is furnished by the learned Government Pleader, which are as follows:

1. Keelvelur Government Higher Secondary School
2. Kadinavayal Government Higher Secondary School
3. Kurukkathi Government Higher Secondary School
4. Sembodai Government Higher Secondary School
5. Ayakkaranpulam Government Higher Secondary School
6. Kolayampattinam Government Higher Secondary School https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page 6/8 W.A.No.411 of 2021 and C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021
7. Erumal Thokkalakudi Government High School
8. Kattupadugai Government High School
9. Thirunagari Government High School
10. Thoduvaai Government High School
11. Agaraperumthottam Government High School

9. In the light of the discussions and the decisions quoted above, the writ petitioner is entitled for the post of Lab Assistant. Accordingly, the appellants are directed to accommodate the writ petitioner/respondent in any of the vacancies in the schools close to her place of residence, so that it will not cause further hardship to her. The above said exercise, may be completed within a period of four weeks and compliance shall be filed.

10. The writ appeal is dismissed with the above direction. No costs. Consequently, the connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.

11. Post the writ appeal for compliance on 09.08.2021.




                                                                 [P.S.N., J.] [K.R., J.]
                                                                        08.07.2021
                     Index          : Yes / No
                     Internet       : Yes / No
                     Asr

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                     Page 7/8
                                             W.A.No.411 of 2021 and
                                             C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021



                                   PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
                                                       AND
                                       KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
                                                        Asr




                                        W.A.No.411 of 2021 and
                                        C.M.P. No.1649 of 2021




                                            Date :   08.07.2021



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                     Page 8/8