Conflicting Views On Caste Status Verification After Retirement: Madras High Court Refers Matter To Larger Bench

The Court was hearing two writ petitions assailing the validity of proceedings initiated by the Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee (TNSLSC) for verification of community certificates, one of which had been commenced before the petitioner’s retirement, and the other after retirement.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan observed that, as there exist “conflicting views taken by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court on the issues mentioned herein above, we are inclined to refer these cases to a Larger Bench to answer the following questions of law.”

Advocate P. Thangavel appeared for the petitioners, while A. Edwin Prabakar, State Government Pleader, assisted by K. Karthik Jagannath, represented the respondents. Sunita Kumari, Senior Panel Counsel, appeared on behalf of the Union of India.

Background

The petitioners had approached the Court challenging the continuation and initiation of enquiries by the TNSLSC into their community certificates. It was contended that such proceedings could not be continued after their retirement, and that community certificates issued before 1995 could not be subjected to scrutiny.

In one case, the petitioner challenged a show-cause notice issued in 2018 and the continuation of the enquiry after his retirement in 2022. In the other, the petitioner questioned proceedings initiated in 2021, after his retirement in 2019, and sought release of pensionary benefits.

The petitioners relied upon earlier Division Bench decisions, which had held that verification of caste status after retirement is impermissible, including S.R. Krishnakumari v. Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee-III and N. Vasugi v. The Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-III.

The State, on the other hand, relied on V. Perumal v. Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee-III and C. Arumugam v. The Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-II, where it was held that such verification can continue even after retirement and that community certificates issued prior to 1995 are not immune from scrutiny.

Court’s Observation

The Bench examined various decisions of coordinate Benches and noted that “a clear cleavage of opinion emerges.”

Referring to V. Perumal, the Court observed that there was a difference of opinion as to whether verification could be undertaken for certificates issued before 1995. The Third Judge had held that “there is no prohibition against enquiry into a fake or false community certificate, even if issued before 1995.” The majority view, therefore, concluded that there was no bar to such verification.

The Court further noted that in C. Arumugam, it was held that verification of caste status even after retirement is valid, and that the process must reach its logical end irrespective of the date of appointment or issuance of the certificate.

The Division Bench in that case had laid down that delay in initiation does not invalidate scrutiny and that “verification once started shall continue till its logical end and retirement of an employee during enquiry as to his caste status or community certificate does not affect the proceedings.”

However, the Bench observed that a “discordant note” was struck by the majority view in S.R. Krishnakumari, where it was held that verification of community certificates after retirement is impermissible when the delay is attributable to the employer. A similar view was taken in N. Vasugi, holding that post-retirement enquiries into community certificates should not be allowed.

Conclusion

After examining the judicial divergence, the High Court referred the following questions for determination by a Larger Bench:

(a) Whether verification into the genuineness of community certificate or caste status of an employee is permissible after retirement from service?
(b) Whether verification into the genuineness of community certificate or caste status of an employee is permissible in cases where the employee was issued community certificate or granted employment prior to 1995?
(c) Whether verification into the genuineness of community certificate or caste status, which was initiated prior to retirement, could be continued after retirement of the employee?

The Registrar (Judicial) was directed to place the matter before the Chief Justice for the constitution of a Larger Bench.

Cause Title: R. Gurusamy v. The Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee & Others

Appearances

Petitioners: Advocate P. Thangavel

Respondents: A. Edwin Prabakar, State Government Pleader, assisted by K. Karthik Jagannath, Government Advocate, Sunita Kumari, Senior Panel Counsel

Click here to read/download Judgment