1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 13.12.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P(MD)Nos.12845 to 12849 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2 and 2 of 2011 1. M.Sambath ..Petitioner in W.P.12845/2011 2. S.Karuppiah ..Petitioner in W.P.12846/2011 3. P.Muthu ..Petitioner in W.P.12847/2011 4. S.Ganesan ..Petitioner in W.P.12848/2011 5. P.Vellaichamy ..Petitioner in W.P.12849/2011 Vs 1. The Chief Engineer/Personnel/Admn., Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,Chennai-2. 2. The Superintending Engineer, Office of the Superintending Engineer, Pudukkottai Electricity Distribution Circle, Pudukkottai. ..Respondents in all W.Ps' Common Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the orders of the second respondent in his proceedings in Ku.No.100/Nipil/0o3/Ko.o.na/11,Ku.No.99/Nipil/0o3/Ko.o.na/11,Ku.No.96/Nipil /0o3/Ko.o.na/11,Ku.No.98/Nipil/0o3/Ko.o.na/11,Ku.No.97/Nipil/0o3/Ko.o.na/11 dated 03.11.2011 in W.P.Nos.12845 to 12849 of 2011 respectively and to quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and consequently to direct the second respondent to reinstate the petitioners into service within stipulated time fixed by this Court. For Petitioners :M/s.K.Baalasundharam in all W.Ps' For Respondents :Mr.C.Selvaraj in all W.Ps' COMMON ORDER W.P.No.12845 of 2011 is filed against the impugned order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings Ku.No.100/Nipil/0o3/Ko.o.na/11,dated 03.11.2011 and to quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and consequently to direct the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service within stipulated time fixed by this Court. 2. Similarly, W.P.Nos.12846 to 12849 of 2011 were filed by the similarly placed persons, praying for the same relief. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. All the Writ Petitioners were engaged as a Contract Labourers by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board from the year 1988 onwards. Subsequently, they have been selected for appointment in the year 2007. After, have been selected in the year 2007 in the time scale of pay of Rs.2570-60-350-75-3950 and they were subsequently alloted to the Aranthangi Division by the proceedings of the second respondent in Memo No.1124/Admn II/A1/F.Mazdoor/07/1, dated 08.09.2007 and thereafter they have successfully completed their probation. 4. When the matter stood as above, the Petitioners in the meanwhile have also rendered more than two decades of services and their services were regularized in the year 2007. Subsequently, they have been issued with Show-Cause Notice by the second respondent asking to show-cause as to why their services should not be terminated for production of bogus educational certificate at the time of their appointment. Thereafter, the second respondent passed the impugned orders terminating their service. The said orders of termination was challenged before this Court by way of W.P.Nos. 4779,4781,4780,4777,4778 of 2011 and this Court by order, dated 26.04.2011 disposed of the Writ Petitions directing the petitioners to submit their explanation before the second respondent for his show-cause notice and thereafter to pass appropriate orders by the second respondent. 5. In the light of the direction issued by this Court, the petitioners have also submitted their explanation and the second respondent after going through the same orally instructed the concerned officer not to allow the petitioners to attend the office from the month of August 2011. Subsequently, when the petitioners approached the Assistant Engineer (Operation and Maintenance), Aranthangi, they have been informed that he has got instructions from the Chairman of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board not to permit the petitioners from attending the office for the reason that they have produced bogus educational certificate for their promotion. 6. Once again, W.P.No.8502,8503,8504,8500 and 8504 of 2011 was filed by the petitioners, seeking an order to forbear the respondents from interfering into their service condition without conducting any enquiry and following the procedures contemplated under TNEB Standing Orders relating to the allegation of production of bogus educational qualification certificate. But this Court by order, dated 02.08.2011 dismissed the Writ Petitions, however has given liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum or to challenge the order of termination in the manner known to law. 7. Under this background, it is contended that the respondents by taking advantage of the order, without framing of charges or conducting enquiry as contemplated under Order 32 of the TNEB Standing Orders, the second respondent passed the termination orders. 8. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioners is that for the post of Mazdoor, there is no educational qualification prescribed. When the petitioners were absorbed as Mazdoor and their appointments were also regularized, it is not open to the second respondent to say that the petitioners have failed to possess necessary educational qualification. It has been further submitted that when there is no educational qualification for the appointment to the post of Mazdoor, issuing show-cause notice with the allegation that the petitioners have failed to produce the original https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 educational certificates is totally uncalled for. He has also brought to the notice of this Court a Boards proceedings in B.P(F.B)No.27, dated 07.11.2002, wherein, in para 6 a(i) and a(ii), it is stated that the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board has already passed an order holding that the punishment of removal/dismissal from service imposed by the Superintending Engineers for production of bogus certificate for qualification or age by Contract Labourers absorbed as Helpers shall be cancelled. However, the case of punishment of dismissal/removal from service imposed were directed to be modified to that of reduction of pay to the minimum of the time scale of pay of the post held on the date of issue of orders for a period of three years which will operate for future increments. 9. Relying heavily on para 6 a(i) and 6 a(ii) of the Proceedings in (F.B)No.27, dated 07.11.2002, it was further contended that the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board/first respondent has already passed the Board's Proceedings cancelling the order of punishment of removal/dismissal from service imposed by the Superintending Engineers for production of bogus certificate for qualification or age by Contract Labourers,hence and the benefit of the Board's Proceedings (F.B)No.27, dated 07.11.2002 shall be equally applicable to the petitioners as well and prayed for quashing the impugned orders. 10. In reply,the learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that in similar circumstance in W.P.No.5964 to 5968 of 2011, dated 25.03.2011 by applying the above mentioned Board's Proceedings in (F.B) No.27, dated 07.11.2002, this Court has held that the said Board's Proceedings shall be made applicable to those Contract employees whose services were terminated for production of bogus certificate for qualification. It is also relevant to extract para 5 and 6 of the order made in W.P.Nos.5964 to 5968 of 2011, which reads as under: "5. We are convinced that the said Board Proceedings should be made applicable in respect of all those contract employees whose services came to be terminated on the ground of production of bogus certificate. The respondent is also one such contract employee, who came to be inducted as a regular employee by the order, dated 11/02/2000, which service came to be terminated by the order dated 25.03.2000 solely on the ground that he produced a bogus certificate. Therefore, by virtue of the benefit granted under B.P.(F.B) No.27, dated 07.11.2002, the petitioner is also entitled be re-inducted into service, in the same manner in which the services of similarly placed employee came to be restored. 6. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this Writ appeal. The Writ Appeal stands dismissed and the order of the learned Single Judge stands confirmed." 11. Since the issue raised in the present Writ Petitions has already been covered by the Board's Proceedings (F.B)No.27, dated 07.11.2002 issued by the Chief Engineer/Personnel categorically holding that the punishment of removal/dismissal from service imposed by the Superintending Engineers for production of bogus certificate for qualification or age by Contract Labourers shall be cancelled and in lieu thereof the said punishments shall be modified to that of reduction of pay to the minimum https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 of the time-scale of pay of the post held on the date of issue of orders for a period of three years which will operate for future increments, the above said benefit granted as per Board proceedings (F.B)No.27, dated 07.11.2002 shall be extended to the petitioners. By so extending the benefit to the petitioners, it is held that they are also entitled to get re-instated in their service in the same manner in which the service of similarly placed persons came to be restored. However, it is open to the first respondent to pass appropriate orders for imposing punishment as contemplated under Para 6 a(i) and 6 a(ii) of Board's Proceedings in (F.B) No.27, dated 07.11.2002. 12. With these observations, the Writ petitions are disposed of and the impugned orders stands quashed. Further, the second respondent/The Superintending Engineer, Office of the Superintending Engineer, Pudukkottai Electricity Distribution Circle, Pudukkottai is directed to re-instate the petitioners in service within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed. No costs. SD ASST REGISTRAR(CO) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR vsn To 1. The Chief Engineer/Personnel/Admn., Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai-2. 2. The Superintending Engineer, Office of the Superintending Engineer, Pudukkottai Electricity Distribution Circle,Pudukkottai. 5cc To M/s.K.Balasundharam, Advocate in SR No.43518 1cc To M/S.S.Dhayalan, Advocate in SR No.43750 SB:30/12/2011 4P 9C W.P(MD)Nos.12845 to 12849 OF 2011 13.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/