(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 10.12.2013 in W.P. No. 12228 of 2010.)

P.D. Audikesavalu, J.

The intra-Court Appeal arises out of the order dated 10.12.2013 in W.P. No. 12228 of 2010 passed by the Learned Judge of this Court.

2. The chronological sequence of events leading to the filing of this Writ Appeal are given below:

(i) The Appellant, who was sponsored through Employment Exchange at Krishnagiri was appointed as Sanitary Worker on 09.08.1989 in Sub-Jail at Dharmapuri pursuant to the interview conducted at the Central Prison, Salem and regularized with effect from 16.08.1989.

(ii) A complaint was received by the Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu from M/s. V. Viswanathan and V. Ragavan alleging that the Appellant had secured employment as Sanitary Worker on the basis of a bogus certificate regarding his educational qualification and proceedings under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, were initiated against the Appellant. In the enquiry conducted, it was established that the claim of the Appellant that he had passed VIII standard was on the basis of the bogus certificate produced by him and accordingly, he was removed from service by order No. 5295/SJ1/95 dated 03.10.1996 of the Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison, Salem.

(iii) The Appellant challenged his removal from service in O.A. No. 306 of 1997 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. On the abolition of that Tribunal, the said application was transferred to this Court and taken on file as W.P. No. 29734 of 2006.

(iv) During the hearing of the said Writ Petition, the Learned Judge took note of the fact that the statutory appeal had been preferred by the Appellant before the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Coimbatore Range and that the same could not be disposed of in view of the proceedings initiated by the Appellant before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, which had been subsequently transferred to this Court and hence, that Writ Petition was disposed without going into the merits by directing the Additional Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Chennai to pass orders on the appeal preferred by the Appellant on merits and in accordance with law.

(v) The Inspector General (Prison) by order No. 1993/E.S.2/2009 dated 29.04.2009 confirmed the order of removal from service dated 03.10.1996 passed by the Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison, Salem.

(vi) The Appellant challenged the said order No. 1993/E.S.2/2009 dated 29.04.2009 passed by the Inspector General (Prison), in W.P. No. 12228 of 2010 before this Court.

(vii) The Learned Judge, who heard the Writ Petition, by order dated 10.12.2013, came to the conclusion that inasmuch as it was admitted by the Appellant that he has produced the bogus certificate showing that he had passed VIII standard, he had not come up with clean hands and that the findings of the Enquiry Officer that the Appellant secured employment with a bogus certificate had been established, and dismissed the Writ Petition.

Aggrieved thereby, the Appellant has preferred the present appeal.

3. We have heard Mr. S. Gunaseelan, Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, Mrs. A. Sri Jayanthi, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.

4. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant strenuously urged that the post of Sanitary Worker is shown as category 8 in Class IV of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic Service and the educational qualification of candidates for appointment through direct recruitment to any of the categories in Class IV is that he must be able to read and write in Tamil as required under Rule 5(2)(aa) of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic Service and that the stipulation of pass in VIII standard was only in respect of the posts in Class I, II and III and as such, the Appellant had been wrongfully removed from service by the Disciplinary Authority whose order was erroneously confirmed by the Appellant Authority. In support of the said contention, reliance is placed on the decisions of this Court in P. Mahendran -vs- Chief Engineer (Order dated 20.06.2003 in W.P. No. 6932 of 2002), N. Sekar -vs- Director of Medical Education [(2009) 4 CTC 158] [LQ/MadHC/2009/1565] and the Division Bench of this Court in E. Rengammal -vs- Superintendent (Order dated 25.01.2018 in W.A. No. 1085 of 2016) in which one of us (K.K. Sasidharan, J.) is a party.

5. We find that there is substantial force in the aforesaid contention raised on behalf of the Appellant inasmuch as the production of the bogus certificate showing that the Appellant had passed VIII standard was inconsequential. The educational qualification prescribed for the instant post was that the candidate must be able to read and write Tamil. It is not the case of the Respondents that the Appellant was not able to read and write Tamil.

6. In that view of the matter, fortified by the aforesaid decisions cited by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, we hold that the order No. 1993/E.S.2/2009 dated 29.04.2009 passed by the Inspector General of Prison, confirming the order No. 5295/SJ1/95 dated 03.10.1996 passed by the Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison, Salem, cannot be sustained and accordingly, the same are quashed and the Appellant is liable to be reinstated with continuity of service. It is further made clear that if the Appellant had attained the age of superannuation in the interregnum, he shall be treated as having served continuously in the post till retirement for the purpose of terminal and pensionary benefits. However, having regard to the fact that the Appellant had produced a bogus certificate of having passed VIII standard though the same was not required for being appointed to that post, we are of the considered view that the Appellant shall not be entitled to any monetary benefits till today. The concerned authorities shall issue necessary orders in this regard, which shall be communicated to the Appellant and a report of compliance in that regard shall be filed before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court by 31.05.2019 without fail.

7. In the result, the Writ Appeal succeeds and the order dated 10.12.2013 in W.P. No. 12228 of 2010 is set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of on the aforesaid terms. No costs.