IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Date:- 24.11.2009 Coram The Honourable Mr. Justice M. CHOCKALINGAM and The Honourable Mr. Justice V. PERIYA KARUPPIAH W.P. No.10291 of 2008 R. Neelavathy ... Petitioner ..Vs.. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Adi-dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The District Collector and Chairman, District Level Vigilance Committee, Madurai District. 3. The Union of India, rep. by the Chief Signal and Telecommunication Engineer, Construction Branch, Southern Railway, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records relating to the communication of the first respondent in Letter No.21379/CV-III/2007-I dated 26.11.2007 and the proceedings of the second respondent in proceedings No.Ni.Mu.90871/Adi-8/2001 dated 4.6.2007 and quash the orders passed therein and consequently direct the third respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits arising therefrom. For Petitioner : Ms. V.J. Latha For Respondent : Mr. A. Arumugham, Spl. Govt. Pleader for R1 and R2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by M. CHOCKALINGAM, J.) This writ petition has been brought forth by the petitioner seeking to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records relating to the communication of the first respondent in Letter No.21379/CV-III/2007-I dated 26.11.2007 and the proceedings of the second respondent in proceedings No.Ni.Mu.90871/Adi-8/2001 dated 4.6.2007 and quash the same and consequently direct the third respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits arising therefrom. 2. Affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is perused. The Court heard the learned counsel appearing for either side. 3. On the strength of the community Certificate claiming that she belongs to the Scheduled Caste, the petitioner sought appointment in the Railways and she joined as Junior Stenographer in the year 1985. While in service, it was found that she did not belong to the Scheduled Caste and thereafter, she was terminated from service. Challenging the termination, she took the proceedings before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai by filing O.A. No.612 of 2007 and the same was dismissed. 4. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner filed W.P. No.37911 of 2007 and this Court passed an order dated 3.1.2008 as follows:- " 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the question relating to cancellation of the community certificate is under dispute, the petitioner should not have been terminated from service. We do not think that such a contention can be countenanced. If the cancellation of the community certificate is found to be erroneous, then at that stage, the petitioner would be taken back in service. Therefore, there is nothing to interfere with the impugned order of the Tribunal. Ultimately, if the petitioner succeeds in the connected writ appeal filed against the writ petition in W.P. No.35599 of 2007, then at that stage, the petitioner would be taken back in service, in accordance with law." 5. While the aforesaid writ petition was pending, challenging the order passed by the District Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, which recorded a finding that the Certificate placed by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the petitioner was a fraud one, the petitioner preferred a writ petition in W.P. No.35599 of 2007 before this Court and the same was also transferred to Madurai Bench of this Court and the same was pending. 6. While the matter stood thus, an order came to be passed by the State Level Committee, confirming the order of the District Level Vigilance Committee. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition has been brought forth by the petitioner. When the said writ petition was taken up for enquiry, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has made an endorsement as follows:- " Since W.P. 35599 of 2007 which is transferred, challenging the order of District level Committee, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to prosecute the said writ petition pending before Madurai Bench." 7. In view of the same, the petitioner is permitted to pursue the writ petition pending on the file of the Madurai Bench. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar /True Copy/ Sub.Asst.Registrar ssa. To 1. The Secretary to Government, The State of Tamil Nadu, Adi-dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Fort St. George,Chennai – 600 009. 2. The District Collector and Chairman, District Level Vigilance Committee, Madurai District. 3. The Chief Signal and Telecommunication Engineer, The Union of India, Construction Branch, Southern Railway, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. + 1 cc to Government Pleader,SR.63522 BKY(CO) EM/7.12.09 W.P. No.10291 of 2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/