Madras High Court
Vva. Salahuddeen Aalim vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 13 April, 2016
Bench: V.Ramasubramanian, N.Kirubakaran
Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Dated : 13.04.2016
Coram
The Honourable Mr.Justice V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN
and
The Honourable Mr.Justice N.KIRUBAKARAN
Writ Appeal (MD) No.127 of 2015
and
M.P.(MD) Nos. 1 & 2 of 2015
VVA. Salahuddeen Aalim
District Kazi,
Ramanathapuram District. ... Appellant
Versus
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Backward Classes, Most Backward
Classes and Minorities Welfare (SI
Department), Fort St. George,
Chennai.
2. The District Collector,
Ramanathapuram District,
Ramanathapuram.
3. The Director,
Syed Hameeda Arabic College,
Keelakarai,
Ramanathapuram District.
4. AMM Kadar Buksh Husain Siddigi. ... Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, seeking to set
aside the order dated 15.10.2014 made in W.P.(MD) No.16854 of 2014.
!For Appellant .. Mr.M.Ajmalkhan, Sr.Counsel for
M/s Ajmal Associates.
^For Respondents-1 to 3 .. Mr.M.Alaguthevan, Spl.G.P.
For Respondent-4 .. Mr.K.Govindarajan
:JUDGMENT
This Appeal arises out of the dismissal of a writ petition filed by the appellant, challenging the appointment of the 4th respondent herein as Kazi for the District of Ramanathapuram.
2. We have heard Mr.M.Ajmalkhan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, Mr.M.Alaguthevan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.K.Govindarajan, learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent.
3. The appellant herein was appointed as Kazi for the entire District of Ramanathapuram. The appointment of Kazi was made by the State Government, in exercise of the power conferred by Section 2 of The Kazis Act, 1880.
4. Though Section 2 of the said Act empowers the State Government to appoint one or more Kazis for any local area, the appointment should be made after consulting the Principal Mohammedan Residents of the area. The guidelines for appointment of Kazis were framed by the Government under G.O.Ms.No.260, Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowments Department dated 22.7.1996. By the said Government Order, a State Level Committee was constituted for the purpose. But the guidelines were revised by G.O.Ms.No.30 Backward Classes, Most Backward Classes and Minorities Welfare (SI Department), dated 5.7.2002. As per these revised guidelines, District Level Selection Committees were constituted in each District. The Committee will be headed by the District Collector. Five qualified Ulemas and two important Muslim citizens of the concerned District, nominated by the Collector, will be the other members of the Committee. The Annexure to the Government Order prescribed the qualifications for appointment.
5. The appellant himself was appointed in accordance with the aforesaid guidelines, under G.O.Ms.No.35, Backward Classes, Most Backward Classes and Minorities Welfare (SI Department), dated 19.5.2009. The appointment was for the entire District of Ramanathapuram.
6. But, all of a sudden, by G.O.Ms.No.43 dated 28.7.2014, the Government reduced the jurisdictional area of the appellant to Paramakudi Revenue Division of Ramanathapuram District. By another order in G.O.Ms.No.44 issued on the same date, the 4th respondent was appointed as Kazi for the Ramanathapuram Revenue Division of Ramanathapuram District.
7. Aggrieved by the said appointment, the appellant came up with a writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.16854 of 2014. But, the said writ petition was dismissed by the learned Judge on the short ground that when the power conferred upon the Government under Section 2 of the Kazis Act 1880 had been exercised in the manner prescribed by law, the same cannot be upset by this Court. Therefore, the appellant has come up with the above appeal.
8. At first blush, we are unable to find fault with the view taken by the learned Judge, since Section 2 of the Kazis Act, 1880 confers power upon the State Government to appoint one or more Kazis for any area. Without dislodging the appellant, the Government had appointed the 4th respondent as one more Kazi for the same area and has also earmarked the jurisdiction of both of them.
9. But the contention of the learned senior counsel for the appellant is
(i) that when the power to appoint Kazis is conferred upon the State Government, there was no occasion for the District Collector to make a recommendation for the appointment of the 4th respondent;
(ii) that there is no indication in the impugned orders that there was consultation with the local Muslims; and
(iii) that Section 2 of the Act uses the phrase "if it thinks fit" indicating thereby that there should be an application of mind on the part of the Government.
10. In addition to the above three grounds, the learned senior counsel also brought to our notice the fact that the 4th respondent has produced a false certificate with regard to his qualifications and that therefore, his appointment is vitiated by fraud.
11. A look at the Annexure to G.O.Ms.No.30 dated 5.7.2012 would show that a person to be recommended for appointment as Kazi should be an Aalim or Fazil, well-versed in Islamic jurisprudence or served as a Professor or teacher in any recognized Arabic College or Institution. According to the appellant, the 4th respondent does not fulfill these qualifications, but had produced fabricated documents and played a fraud.
12. In the writ appeal, the 4th respondent filed an affidavit claiming that he joined the third respondent college and obtained a degree of Aalim Fazil. The third respondent college originally claimed to be affiliated to the Alagappa University. But later the 4th respondent claimed that the particular degree course was not affiliated to the Alagappa University. In the Notification issued by the University Grants Commission in March 2014, the University Grants Commission has indicated the nomenclature of all degrees that could be recognized by the University Grants Commission. As per the said Notification, a degree could be offered in "Fazil" . Alternatively, it could be offered in "Afzal-Ul-Ulma". The qualification for entry into these courses is a pass in the X Standard and a pass in the Higher Secondary Course with Aalim/Afzal-Ul-Ulma preliminary. Similarly, the list of courses offered by Madarsas furnished by the appellant shows that a degree could be obtained either in Aalim or in Fazil. Therefore, the claim of the 4th respondent, which has also been accepted by the first respondent Government as though the 4th respondent acquired a degree in Aalim Fazil, appears to be incorrect.
13. The third respondent has complicated matters further by filing a counter affidavit before this court through its Principal. As per the counter affidavit of the third respondent, the 4th respondent studied the alleged course only for a period of one year from 28.9.2009 to 5.8.2010. We do not know how a degree could be offered after undergoing a course of a duration of one year.
14. After the Principal of the third respondent filed a counter affidavit to the above effect, the appellant filed an affidavit stating that Mr.S.Abdul Nazar Jamali, who had sworn to the counter affidavit of the third respondent, was not the Principal of the College, but served as a Principal in-charge during an earlier period. At the time when the counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the third respondent, the deponent was not the Principal.
15. In the light of such a shocking revelation, we directed the Director of the third respondent to appear in person before this court, since an impersonation had taken place in our presence. But, he did not appear. The degree course allegedly undergone by the 4th respondent is also not of a duration of three years. Therefore it appears that the 4th respondent secured the appointment as Kazi on the basis of a false claim and attempted to justify the same before this court by filing a false affidavit through the third respondent.
16. Hence, we are of the considered view that the appeal deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the order of the learned Judge is set aside and the writ petition shall stand allowed. No costs. .