Madras High Court
N.Karpagambigai vs The Chairman And Managing Director on 14 December, 2021
Author: S.Srimathy
Bench: S.Srimathy
W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 14.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013
and
M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2013
N.Karpagambigai ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The Chairman and Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and
Distribution Corporation Limited,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 2.
2.The Chief Engineer (Personnel),
Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and
Distribution Corporation Limited,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 2.
3.The Chief Engineer / Distribution,
Madurai Region,
TANGEDCO, K.Pudur,
Madurai - 7.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013
4.P.Balakrishnan,
Assistant Engineer,
TANGEDCO,
6/124, East Street,
Nallammalpuram,
Tirunelveli. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the
impugned result publishned by the respondents through their official website on
12.07.2012 in so far as the impugned list relates to the selection of the fourth
respondent as Assistant Engieer in the Inter Caste Marriage priority category from
among Electronics & Communication Engineering candidates and rejecting the
candidature of the petitioner to the post of Assistant Engineer under Inter Caste
Marriage priority and to quash the same and consequently to direct the
respondents to appoint the petitioner as Assistant Engineer in the Inter Caste
Marriage priority category in the interview conducted by the second respondent
on 24.06.2012.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Thangasamy
For R1 to R3 : Mr.T.Sakthikumaran
For R4 : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu
*****
2/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned result published by the respondents through their official website on 12.07.2012 in so far as the impugned list relates to the selection of the fourth respondent as Assistant Engineer in the Inter Caste Marriage priority category from among Electronics & Communication Engineering candidates and rejecting the candidature of the petitioner to the post of Assistant Engineer under Inter Caste Marriage priority and consequently to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Assistant Engineer in the Inter Caste Marriage priority category in the interview conducted by the second respondent on 24.06.2012.
2.The petitioner has passed B.E., degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering during April 2009 in first class with aggregate mark of 71%. The petitioner belongs to BC community and married one Ashokkumar who is Hindu Pallan Community comes under SC on 17.03.2010. Since it is an 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013 inter caste marriage, it was registered on 19.03.2010. On 10.11.20101, the District Social Welfare Officer, Theni, conveyed his appreciation and has issued a Congratulation Certificate for the said inter caste marriage. The petitioner enrolled in the Executive Employment Branch at Madurai and subsequently has entered under “inter caste marriage” status with the Employment Exchange. The respondents called for the list of B.E. (E.C.E)., qualified candidates from the registered Employment Branch, Madurai, for selection and appointment of 22 B.E.,(E.C.E), candidates.
3.The contention of the petitioner is that her name was sponsored under the priority category, she had filled up the application along with the Appreciation Letter of the District Social Welfare Officer but the respondents have not considered her name under the priority category and has challenged the appointment of the fourth respondent, namely, Balakrishnan.
4.The respondents have filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner was considered under the priority category but on certificate 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013 verification, the petitioner has produced marriage registration certificate and the Appreciation Letter of the District Social Welfare Officer and has not produced any certificate issued by the Tahsildar. The Tahsildar is the appropriate authority who would issue the certificate after verification of the records and reports of the local authorities.
5.Heard Mr.R.Thangasamy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.T.Sakthikumaran, learned Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu, learned Counsel appearing for fourth respondent.
6.The claim of the petitioner is that it is an inter caste marriage and the petitioner belongs to Hindu Gowda community and the petitioner's husband belongs to Hindu Pallan community. Therefore, she claims her appointment ought to be granted under the priority category, i.e., inter caste marriage. The petitioner relied on the certificate enclosed by the District Social Welfare Officer, which reads as follows:
5/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013 "r%f eyk; kw;Wk; rj;JzTj; jpl;lj;Jiw ghuhl;L kly;
rhjp-tFg;gw;w rKjhaj;jijj; Njhw;Wtg;gjw;fhfj;
jPzl
; hikia xopf;f Ntz;Lnkd;fpw murhq;ff;
nfhs;ifiaAk; Fwpf;NfhisAk; filgpbj;J Njdp
khtl;lj;jpy; trpf;Fk; jpU.gTd;uh[; mth;fspd; kfd; jpU.P.mNrhf;Fkhh; mth;fSk; Njdp khtl;lj;ijr; Nrh;e;j jpU.ehuhazd; mth;fspd; Gjy;tp jpUkjp.N.fw;gfhk;gpif mth;fSk; 17 Njjp khh;r; khjk; 2010 tUlk; md;W fyg;Gj; jpUkzk; nra;J nfhz;lijf; fUjp> jkpo;ehL murhq;fk; mth;fSf;Fj; jdJ ghuhl;Lfisj; njhptpj;Jf; nfhs;fpd;wJ."
7.Admittedly, it is a ghuhl;L kly;,i.e., a Congratulation Certificate. Even, the petitioner has categorized the certificate as a “Congratulations Certificate” in her affidavit. This certificate cannot be considered as a certificate issued by a competent authority. The respondents relied on the memorandum No. 011494/24/G.55/G.55/2011, dated 09.04.2012, under Clause 5, it is clearly stated that the certificate ought to have been issued by the competent authority. Since the Tahsildar is the competent authority, the “Congratulation Certificate” issued by the District Social Welfare Officer cannot be considered as the certificate issued by the competent authority. The relevant portion of the memorandum is 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013 extracted below:
"5.In the case of an applicant who claims to belong to priority group (i.e. Ex-Servicemen, Dependent of Ex-Servicemen, Repatriates, Destitute Widows, Retrenched employees of Government, Inter-Caste Marriage etc.) he/she should produce the certificate in the prescribed form obtained from a competent authority in support of his/her claim. In the case of an applicant who claims priority as Dependent of Ex-Servicemen, he/she should obtain the certificate as on 01.07.2011, in the prescribed form obtained from the competent authority."
8.This Court is of the considered opinion that the “Congratulation Certificate” is only an Appreciation Letter and can never be considered as a inter caste marriage certificate issued by the competent authority. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index : Yes / No 14.12.2021
Internet : Yes
Tmg
7/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013
S.SRIMATHY, J
Tmg
Order made in
W.P.(MD)No.19587 of 2013
14.12.2021
8/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis