Madras High Court
R.Gurusamy vs The Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny … on 30 July, 2026
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 07.07.2026
DELIVERED ON : 30.07.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,
CHIEF JUSTICE
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN
WP Nos.23827, 23854, 23885 of 2025; 25276 and 25277 of 2012;
8080 of 2019; 12549 of 2021; and 492 of 2023
and WMP Nos.13329 and 13328 of 2021; 441 of 2023
W.P.No.23827 of 2025:
R.Gurusamy
S/o. Late. Ramasamy Reddy,
Door No.40/123, K.R.G. Nagar,
III Cross, Ganapathy,
Coimbatore - 641 006.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee
Rep. by the Principal Secretary to Government,
Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department,
Secretariat, Chennai-9.
2. The Director of Tribal Welfare and Member Secretary
State Level Scrutiny Committee, Chepauk,
Chennai-05.
______________
Page 1 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
3. The Senior Divisional Personal Officer
Southern Railways, Divisional Railways Manager Office,
Suramangalam, Salem-5.
Respondent(s)
and batch cases
Case No. Counsel for Counsel for Respondents
Petitioner
W.P.No.23827/2025 Mr.V.Raghavachari Mr.Vijay Narayan
Senior Counsel Advocate-General
for Mr.MA.P.Thangavel assisted by
Mr.R.Veeramani
Government Pleader
for R1 and R2
Mrs.Sunita Kumari
Sr. Panel Counsel
for R3
W.P.No.23854/2025 Mr.V.Raghavachari Mr.Vijay Narayan
Senior Counsel Advocate-General
for Mr.MA.P.Thangavel assisted by
Mr.R.Veeramani
Government Pleader
for R1
No appearance
for R2
W.P.No.23885/2025 Mr.V.Raghavachari Mr.Vijay Narayan
Senior Counsel Advocate-General
for Mr.MA.P.Thangavel assisted by
Mr.R.Veeramani
Government Pleader
for R1 and R2
Mrs.Sunita Kumari
Sr. Panel Counsel
for R3
W.P.No.8080/2019 Mr.V.Vijay Shankar Mr.Vijay Narayan
Advocate-General
assisted by
Mr.R.Veeramani
Government Pleader
for R1
______________
Page 2 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath
for R2
W.P.No.12549/2021 Mr.L.Chandrakumar Mr.Vijay Narayan
for Mr. Yogesh Advocate-General
Kannadasan assisted by
Mr.R.Veeramani
Government Pleader
for R1
Mr. P.T.Ram Kumar
Standing Counsel for R2
and R3
W.P.No.25276/2012 Mr.S.Udayakumar Mr.R.Malaichamy for R1
R2-Tribunal
Mr.Dhruva C.K.V.
through video
conferencing
for R3
W.P.No.25277/2012 Mr.S.Udayakumar No appearance
for R1
R2-Tribunal
W.P.No.492/2023 Mr.V.Raghavachari Mr.Vijay Narayan
Senior Counsel Advocate-General
for Mr.MA.P.Thangavel assisted by
Mr.R.Veeramani
Government Pleader
for R1
Mr.K.Ramanamoorthy
Sr. Panel Counsel for R2
______________
Page 3 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
COMMON ORDER
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
This Full Bench is constituted to resolve a cleavage of judicial
opinion that has split Coordinate Benches of this court. At the heart
of this dispute lies a delicate issue, viz., on one hand, the right of
an individual to live out their twilight years in peace following a
lifetime of labour; and on the other, the foundational mandate of
our Constitution of India to protect social reservations from being
hijacked by fraud and/or deceit.
2. By an order dated 28.10.2025, a Division Bench of this
Court referred the following three questions of law for our
determination:
(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
______________
Page 4 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.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?
CONTENTIONS OF THE PETITIONERS
3. Mr.V.Raghavachari, Senior Counsel; Mr.V.Vijay Shankar;
Mr.L.Chandrakumar; and Mr.S.Udayakumar, learned counsel for the
petitioners, presented a comprehensive argument centered on
fairness, procedural timelines, and human dignity:
(a) It was submitted that prior to the landmark
judgment in Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Additional
Commissioner1, the field was governed by scattered
government orders. In Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra),
the Supreme Court set down strict timelines,
stipulating that verification applications must be filed
1 (1994) 6 SCC 241
______________
Page 5 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.six months in advance of an appointment and
finalized within two months;
(b) Counsel drew attention to the State’s own
regulatory framework, including G.O. (2D) No.108,
Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare (CV-I) Department,
dated 12.9.2007, G.O. (Ms.) No.106, Adi Dravidar
and Tribanl Welfare (CV-I) Department, dated
15.10.2012, and the Manual on Scheduled
Caste/Scheduled Tribe Community Certificates –
Issuance and Verification issued vide G.O. (Ms.)
No.104, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare (CV-I)
Department, dated 21.8.2023, all of which mandate
swift, time-bound verifications. It is contended that
the State/employer cannot sleep over its rights for
decades, only to wield an inquiry like a dangling
sword over an employee at the time of retirement, a
practice explicitly condemned by the Supreme Court
in R.Sundaram v. The Tamil Nadu State Level
Scrutiny Committee and others2.
2 2023 SCC OnLine SC 287
______________
Page 6 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
(c) Relying on a Lok Sabha Secretariat Office
Memorandum dated 24.12.2020, and a Central
Government letter dated 10.8.2020, they argued
that verifying certificates of individuals appointed
before 1995 amounts to harassment and that if no
departmental or judicial proceedings are pending
against the employee at the time of their retirement,
withholding of their retirement benefit is not
permissible.
(d) It is argued that that Kumari Madhuri Patil
(supra) was intended to apply prospectively to
individuals actively in service. Citing Kanishk Sinha
and another v. The State of West Bengal and
another3, it is also argued that judicial directives
aimed at restructuring procedures cannot be applied
retroactively to undo past settlements.
(e) It is pleaded that the decision of the Supreme
Court in Food Corporation of India and others v.
Jagdish Balaram Bahira and others4 contains no
3 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 259
4 (2017) 8 SCC 670
______________
Page 7 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
explicit mandate to reopen the status of long-retired
employees.
(f) The petitioners relied heavily on a string of recent
decisions, including the Supreme Court decision in
Union of India v. S.Renuka and others 5, where the
Supreme Court closed post-retirement inquiry on the
ground that they had become purely academic; and
a Division Bench decision in V.Vallinayagam v. The
Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-II 6, which
followed the Supreme Court decision in S.Renuka
(supra).
(g) They referred to yet another decision of this court
in R.Shanthi v. The State Level Scrutiny Committee
and others7, wherein the writ petition was allowed,
the enquiry notice was set aside and the respondents
were directed to disburse the terminal benefits. It is
stated that SLP (C) No.14135 of 2024, preferred by
the employer against the aforesaid decision, was
5 SLP No.24458 of 2019, dated 3.3.2023
6 W.P.No.27823 of 2023, dated 25.9.2023
7 W.P.No.29351 of 2023, dated 18.4.2024
______________
Page 8 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated
12.7.2024.
(h) They also highlighted the decisions in V.Navajothi
v. The Tamilnadu State Level Scrutiny Committee
and another8 [which was upheld by the Supreme
Court in SLP (C) No.13456 of 2024, vide order dated
11.7.2024] and C.Pasupathi v. The Chairman, State
Level Scrutiny Committee and others9 [SLP (C) Diary
No.1323 of 2023 preferred against the said judgment
was dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order
dated 9.2.2026] where retired employees were
allowed to draw their pension upon giving an
undertaking that their progeny would never claim the
social reservation benefits.
(i) Reference was also made to decisions of the
Kerala High Court in Lalitha and others v. The State
of Kerala and others10 and P.B.Bhanumathi Amma
and others v. State of Kerala11, which held that
8 W.P.No.31438 of 2022, dated 8.3.2024
9 W.P.(MD) No.7471 of 2025, dated 22.8.2025
10 2025 : KER : 41997
11 2025 SCC OnLine Ker 4473
______________
Page 9 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
benefits already accrued during the subsistence of a
certificate cannot be retrospectively pulled back upon
retirement.
(j) It is submitted that in S.R.Krishnakumari v. The
Tamilnadu State Level Scrutiny Committee12,
dissenting views were expressed by the Judges.
While the Senior Judge held that initiation of
vigilance enquiry after petitioner’s superannuation is
unsustainable, the other Judge held that if a person
commits fraud in procuring the community
certificate, it is a fraud played not only against the
society, but against the Constitution. On a reference
made, the third Judge, vide order dated 20.9.2024,
upheld the view taken by the Senior Judge of the
Division Bench.
(k) Reference is also made to yet another split
verdict delivered by a Division Bench of this Court in
V.Perumal v. Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny
Committee and others13, wherein the Senior Judge
12 W.P.No.31452 of 2022, dated 27.3.2024
13 W.P.No.4484 of 2021, dated 24.8.2023
______________
Page 10 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
held that in respect of appointments made prior to
1995, it is not open for the Central Government,
State Government and Public Sector Undertakings to
deny continuous employment or post retirement
benefits on the basis of a post facto finding of falsity
of claims or doubtful caste/community certificates
presented at the time of appointments. The other
Judge held against the petitioner. On a reference
made, the third Judge, vide order dated 16.11.2023,
reiterated the view of the Junior Judge of the Division
Bench, and, in paragraph 37 of the said order,
directed the State to take necessary penal action
against the petitioner, and further directed the
employer to proceed against the petitioner for
necessary action of recovery in accordance with law.
He submitted that on a challenge to the said
decision, the Supreme Court vide order dated
15.12.2023 passed in SLP (C) Diary No.50747 of
2023, stayed the operation of para 37 of the order
dated 16.11.2023.
______________
Page 11 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
CONTENTIONS OF THE STATE
4. Learned Advocate General countered these arguments with
an appeal to constitutional integrity, parity, and the unyielding legal
principle that fraud unravels everything:
(a) The State argued that Questions of law (a) and
(c) are fundamentally connected by a singular truth
that if an entry into service is built on fraud, the
passage of time cannot sanctify it.
(b) Relying on the plenary ruling in Food Corporation
of India and others (supra), it is argued that an
appointment secured via a fake certificate is ab initio
void, it is a non-appointment in the eyes of the law.
Consequently, the protective umbrella of Article 311
of the Constitution does not apply because the
individual never validly entered the service.
(c) It is emphasized that reservation is a vital facet
of the constitutional guarantee of equality. When an
ineligible person occupies a reserved seat, they
commit a fraud on the Constitution and deprive a
______________
Page 12 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
genuine, marginalized candidate of their rightful
place. In such cases, equity has no role to play.
(d) It is argued that Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) did
not alter substantive law, but merely set up an
administrative mechanism for verification. The
underlying law that fraud vitiates every subsequent
benefit remains timeless.
(e) It is submitted that the High Court does not
possess the power to read a prospective limitation
into Supreme Court rulings, unless explicitly stated
by the Supreme Court itself.
(f) Concluding with a reference to paragraph 67 of
Food Corporation of India and others (supra), it is
asserted that protecting the service or retiral benefits
of an individual who falsified their identity is
equivalent to “allowing a thief to retain stolen
property.” Accepting an undertaking to protect a
career built on misrepresentation would violate the
spirit of the Constitution.
______________
Page 13 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
CONSIDERATION & FINDINGS
5. To resolve these questions, we must anchor our reasoning
firmly upon the core propositions established by the Supreme Court
of India.
6. The Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) held
that an admission or appointment wrongly gained on the basis of a
false social status certificate has the direct effect of depriving
genuine Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, or OBC candidates of
the constitutional benefits intended for them. Because spurious
claims deny genuine candidates their livelihoods and educational
opportunities, the Supreme Court ruled that social status
certificates must be scrutinized with the utmost promptitude and
expedition. It laid down a uniform, 15-point procedural matrix,
including the creation of Scrutiny Committees and Vigilance Cells,
expressly to root out fraud. For ease of reference, the procedure
evaluated by the Supreme Court is reproduced herein below:
______________
Page 14 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.“13. The admission wrongly gained or appointment
wrongly obtained on the basis of false social status
certificate necessarily has the effect of depriving the
genuine Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or OBC
candidates as enjoined in the Constitution of the
benefits conferred on them by the Constitution. The
genuine candidates are also denied admission to
educational institutions or appointments to office or
posts under a State for want of social status certificate.
The ineligible or spurious persons who falsely gained
entry resort to dilatory tactics and create hurdles in
completion of the inquiries by the Scrutiny Committee.
It is true that the applications for admission to
educational institutions are generally made by a
parent, since on that date many a time the student
may be a minor. It is the parent or the guardian who
may play fraud claiming false status certificate. It is,
therefore, necessary that the certificates issued are
scrutinised at the earliest and with utmost expedition
and promptitude. For that purpose, it is necessary to
streamline the procedure for the issuance of social
status certificates, their scrutiny and their approval,
which may be the following:
1. The application for grant of social status
certificate shall be made to the Revenue Sub-
Divisional Officer and Deputy Collector or
______________
Page 15 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
Deputy Commissioner and the certificate shall
be issued by such officer rather than at the
Officer, Taluk or Mandal level.
2. The parent, guardian or the candidate, as
the case may be, shall file an affidavit duly
sworn and attested by a competent gazetted
officer or non-gazetted officer with particulars
of castes and sub-castes, tribe, tribal
community, parts or groups of tribes or tribal
communities, the place from which he
originally hails from and other particulars as
may be prescribed by the Directorate
concerned.
3. Application for verification of the caste
certificate by the Scrutiny Committee
shall be filed at least six months in
advance before seeking admission into
educational institution or an appointment
to a post.
4. All the State Governments shall constitute a
Committee of three officers, namely, (I) an
Additional or Joint Secretary or any officer
high-er in rank of the Director of the
department concerned, (II) the Director, Social
Welfare/Tribal Welfare/Backward Class
Welfare, as the case may be, and (III) in the
case of Scheduled Castes another officer who
______________
Page 16 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
has intimate knowledge in the verification and
issuance of the social status certificates. In the
case of the Scheduled Tribes, the Research
Officer who has intimate knowledge in
identifying the tribes, tribal communities, parts
of or groups of tribes or tribal communities.
5. Each Directorate should constitute a
vigilance cell consisting of Senior Deputy
Superintendent of Police in over-all charge and
such number of Police Inspectors to investigate
into the social status claims. The Inspector
would go to the local place of residence and
original place from which the candidate hails
and usually resides or in case of migration to
the town or city, the place from which he
originally hailed from. The vigilance officer
should personally verify and collect all the facts
of the social status claimed by the candidate or
the parent or guardian, as the case may be. He
should also examine the school records, birth
registration, if any. He should also examine the
parent, guardian or the candidate in relation to
their caste etc. or such other persons who
have knowledge of the social status of the
candidate and then submit a report to the
Directorate together with all particulars as
envisaged in the pro forma, in particular, of
______________
Page 17 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
the Scheduled Tribes relating to their peculiar
anthropological and ethnological traits, deity,
rituals, customs, mode of marriage, death
ceremonies, method of burial of dead bodies
etc. by the castes or tribes or tribal
communities concerned etc.
6. The Director concerned, on receipt of the
report from the vigilance officer if he found the
claim for social status to be “not genuine” or
‘doubtful’ or spurious or falsely or wrongly
claimed, the Director concerned should issue
show-cause notice supplying a copy of the
report of the vigilance officer to the candidate
by a registered post with acknowledgement
due or through the head of the educational
institution concerned in which the candidate is
studying or employed. The notice should
indicate that the representation or reply, if
any, would be made within two weeks from the
date of the receipt of the notice and in no case
on request not more than 30 days from the
date of the receipt of the notice. In case, the
candidate seeks for an opportunity of hearing
and claims an inquiry to be made in that
behalf, the Director on receipt of such
representation/reply shall convene the
committee and the Joint/Additional Secretary
______________
Page 18 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
as Chairperson who shall give reasonable
opportunity to the candidate/parent/guardian
to adduce all evidence in support of their
claim. A public notice by beat of drum or any
other convenient mode may be published in
the village or locality and if any person or
association opposes such a claim, an
opportunity to adduce evidence may be given
to him/it. After giving such opportunity either
in person or through counsel, the Committee
may make such inquiry as it deems expedient
and consider the claims vis-à-vis the objections
raised by the candidate or opponent and pass
an appropriate order with brief reasons in
support thereof.
7. In case the report is in favour of the
candidate and found to be genuine and true,
no further action need be taken except where
the report or the particulars given are procured
or found to be false or fraudulently obtained
and in the latter event the same procedure as
is envisaged in para 6 be followed.
8. Notice contemplated in para 6 should be
issued to the parents/guardian also in case
candidate is minor to appear before the
Committee with all evidence in his or their
______________
Page 19 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
support of the claim for the social status
certificates.
9. The inquiry should be completed as
expeditiously as possible preferably by
day-to-day proceedings within such
period not exceeding two months. If after
inquiry, the Caste Scrutiny Committee
finds the claim to be false or spurious,
they should pass an order cancelling the
certificate issued and confiscate the same.
It should communicate within one month
from the date of the conclusion of the
proceedings the result of enquiry to the
parent/guardian and the applicant.
10. In case of any delay in finalising the
proceedings, and in the meanwhile the last
date for admission into an educational
institution or appointment to an officer post, is
getting expired, the candidate be admitted by
the Principal or such other authority competent
in that behalf or appointed on the basis of the
social status certificate already issued or an
affidavit duly sworn by the
parent/guardian/candidate before the
competent officer or non-official and such
admission or appointment should be only
______________
Page 20 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
provisional, subject to the result of the inquiry
by the Scrutiny Committee.
11. The order passed by the Committee shall
be final and conclusive only subject to the
proceedings under Article 226 of the
Constitution.
12. No suit or other proceedings before any
other authority should lie.
13. The High Court would dispose of these
cases as expeditiously as possible within
a period of three months. In case, as per
its procedure, the writ
petition/miscellaneous petition/matter is
disposed of by a Single Judge, then no
further appeal would lie against that order
to the Division Bench but subject to
special leave under Article 136.
14. In case, the certificate obtained or social
status claimed is found to be false, the
parent/guardian/the candidate should be
prosecuted for making false claim. If the
prosecution ends in a conviction and sentence
of the accused, it could be regarded as an
offence involving moral turpitude,
disqualification for elective posts or offices
under the State or the Union or elections to
any local body, legislature or Parliament.
______________
Page 21 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
15. As soon as the finding is recorded by the
Scrutiny Committee holding that the certificate
obtained was false, on its cancellation and
confiscation simultaneously, it should be
communicated to the educational institution
concerned or the appointing authority by
registered post with acknowledgement due
with a request to cancel the admission or the
appointment. The Principal etc. of the
educational institution responsible for making
the admission or the appointing authority,
should cancel the admission/appointment
without any further notice to the candidate and
debar the candidate from further study or
continue in office in a post.”
[emphasis supplied]
7.1. The aforesaid directions were validated in a subsequent
Three-Judge Bench decision of the Supreme Court in Dayaram v.
Sudhir Batham and others14, and it was held that these directions
are legally binding, necessary, and designed to defend the integrity
of public administration.
14 (2012) 1 SCC 333
______________
Page 22 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
7.2. In Dayaram (supra), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that
the procedural directives (Directions 1 to 15) in Madhuri Patil
(supra) are entirely valid and do not constitute an impermissible
legislative overreach. Apropos direction (13) of the decision in
Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra), the Supreme Court clarified that while
intra-court appeals from a Single Judge to a Division Bench cannot
be barred if permitted by local State enactments or Letters Patents,
the substantive command to verify and cancel fraudulent
certificates remains absolute and uncompromised.
7.3. As illuminated by the Three-Judge Bench in Dayaram
(supra), the directions issued in Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) are
intrinsic to the fulfillment of the fundamental and socio-economic
rights of backward classes. The Supreme Court explicitly recognized
that when a legislative vacuum exists, the judiciary has a
constitutional duty to step in and fashion modalities out of the
existing executive apparatus. This ensures that the benefits of
affirmative action are derived exclusively by eligible citizens.
Therefore, the administrative mechanism of the Scrutiny Committee
______________
Page 23 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
functions as a binding ‘quasi-legislative’ stopgap scheme that
remains fully operative until replaced by explicit State legislation.
7.4. Furthermore, Dayaram (supra) clarified that the Scrutiny
Committee is not a traditional adjudicating court or tribunal, but an
investigative administrative body that verifies historical facts
through its Vigilance Cell.
8.1. The foundational ruling that completely governs the
issues before us is the Supreme Court’s decision in Food
Corporation of India (supra). The Supreme Court laid down several
non-negotiable propositions, such as:
(a) An appointment secured against a post reserved
for a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe by a person
who does not belong to that community is a total
nullity from its inception. It is no appointment in law,
and the employee cannot claim the protection of
Article 311 of the Constitution;
(b) The services of a person who obtained an
appointment through a false certificate cannot be
______________
Page 24 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.protected, nor can they be reinstated or insulated
simply because they offer an undertaking that they
or their family members will not claim reserved
benefits in the future. To accept such an undertaking
would be to validate a fraud on the Constitution;
(c) Protecting the service or benefits of a person
found to belong to a non-reserved category would be
akin to “allowing a thief to retain stolen property.”
Equity, compassion, and administrative delay cannot
be pleaded to sustain a benefit that was stolen from
a genuine marginalized candidate; and
(d) When the entry into public service is secured
through a false social status claim, it represents a
fraud on the Constitution itself. Because such an
appointment is a total nullity ab initio, the protective
cover of Article 311 cannot be invoked.
8.2. It is seemly to refer to the relevant observations of the
Supreme Court in Food Corporation of India (supra) hereunder:
______________
Page 25 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.“25. In Bank of India v. Avinash D. Mandivikar,
(2005) 7 SCC 690 the first respondent obtained
an appointment in the service of the bank in
October 1976 on a post reserved for the
Scheduled Tribes. The Scrutiny Committee found that
he did not belong to a Scheduled Tribe and, therefore,
invalidated the caste certificate. Following the
termination of his services the first respondent moved
the High Court which accepted his plea that the
initiation of proceedings against him by the Scrutiny
Committee for verification of the caste certificate in
1987 was beyond a reasonable period. The High
Court, while allowing the plea, reinstated [Avinash
D. Mandivikar v. Bank of India, (2002) 3 CLR 997
(Bom)] him in service with back wages. In an
appeal by the employer, this Court held that once
a claim of the employee to belong to a Scheduled
Tribe had been rejected, the employment was “no
appointment in the eye of the law” and that he
had “absolutely no justification for his claim” in
respect of the post he usurped. Distinguishing the
directions issued in State of Maharashtra v. Milind,
(2001) 1 SCC 4 (under Article 142), this Court held
that : Bank of India v. Avinash D. Mandivikar, (2005) 7
SCC 690 SCC p. 698, para 10:
‘10. The protection under State of
Maharashtra v. Milind, (2001) 1 SCC 4, cannot______________
Page 26 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.be extended to Respondent 1 employee as the
protection was given under the peculiar factual
background of that case. The employee
concerned was a doctor and had rendered long
years of service. This Court noted that on a
doctor, public money has been spent and,
therefore, it will not be desirable to deprive the
society of a doctor’s service. Respondent 1
employee in the present case is a bank
employee and the factor which weighed with
this Court cannot be applied to him.”
The above observations of the Court are also an
indication that para 38 of the decision in State of
Maharashtra v. Milind, (2001) 1 SCC 4 was construed
as consisting of directions issued under Article 142. For
it was on that basis that the court in Bank of
India v. Avinash D. Mandivikar, (2005) 7 SCC 690, held
that no case was made out for protecting the services
of a bank employee who had obtained employment on
the basis of a false claim. Besides, this Court also
held that the first respondent having perpetrated
a fraud, a claim for protection will not be legally
sustainable and a person who had obtained
employment by illegitimate means could not
continue to enjoy the fruits of the appointment
despite the clear finding by the Scrutiny
Committee that “he does not even have a shadow______________
Page 27 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.of a right even to be considered for appointment”.
This Court relied upon the earlier decision in R.
Vishwanatha Pillai v. State of Kerala, (2004) 2 SCC
105, in coming to its conclusion.
26. Another decision of two learned Judges was
in BHEL v. Suresh Ramkrishna Burde, (2007) 5 SCC
336, where a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court
had ordered reinstatement subject to the condition that
the employee would not stake a claim to belong to the
Scheduled Tribe in future. The claim of the employee to
belong to the Halba Scheduled Tribe was invalidated by
the Scrutiny Committee. The employee had been
appointed in May 1982 to a clerical post and in August
1995 the Scrutiny Committee had invalidated the caste
claim initially and again in August 2001 following an
order of remand. A writ petition filed against the order
of invalidation was withdrawn but thereafter, relying on
the observations in the concluding paragraph in State
of Maharashtra v. Milind, (2001) 1 SCC 4, the
employee submitted a representation for the protection
of his services. After the representation was
rejected, the employee moved the High Court
which directed his reinstatement but with the
condition that he would not claim the benefit of
belonging to a Scheduled Caste in future. While
construing the decision in State of
______________
Page 28 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
Maharashtra v. Milind, (2001) 1 SCC 4, (upon which
the High Court had placed reliance), this Court
observed as follows: BHEL v. Suresh Ramkrishna
Burde, (2007) 5 SCC 336, SCC pp. 340-41, paras 7-8)
‘7. The High Court has granted relief to the
respondent and has directed his reinstatement
only on the basis of the Constitution Bench
decision of this Court in State of
Maharashtra v. Milind, (2001) 1 SCC 4. In our
opinion the said judgment does not lay
down any such principle of law that where
a person secures an appointment by
producing a false caste certificate, his
services can be protected and an order of
reinstatement can be passed if he gives
an undertaking that in future he and his
family members shall not take any
advantage of being member of a caste
which is in reserved category. The
questions which required consideration by the
Constitution Bench, are noted in the very first
paragraph of the judgment and they are being
reproduced below : (SCC p. 11, para 1)
‘(1) Whether at all, it is permissible to hold
enquiry and let in evidence to decide or declare
that any tribe or tribal community or part of or
group within any tribe or tribal community is
______________
Page 29 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
included in the general name even though it is
not specifically mentioned in the entry
concerned in the Constitution (Scheduled
Tribes) Order, 1950?
(2) Whether “Halba Koshti” caste is a sub-
tribe within the meaning of Entry 19
(Halba/Halbi) of the said Scheduled Tribes
Order relating to the State of Maharashtra,
even though it is not specifically mentioned as
such?’
8. After thorough discussion of the matter, the
conclusions of the Bench are recorded in para
36 of the Report. It was held that it is not at all
permissible to hold any enquiry or let in any
evidence to decide or declare that any tribe or
tribal community or part of or group within any
tribe or tribal community is included in the
general name even though it is not specifically
mentioned in the entry concerned in the
Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. It
was further held that the notification issued
under clause (1) of Article 342, specifying
Scheduled Tribes, can be amended only by law
to be made by Parliament and it is not open to
the State Governments or courts or any other
authority to modify, amend or alter the list of
______________
Page 30 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
Scheduled Tribes specified in the notification
issued under clause (1) of Article 342 and the
Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order,
1950. The law declared by the Constitution
Bench does not at all lay down that where
a person secures an appointment by
producing a false caste certificate, his
services can be protected on his giving an
undertaking that in future he will not take
any advantage of being a member of the
reserved category.’
In this view of the matter, the High Court was
held to be in error in setting aside the order of
termination and in directing reinstatement of the
employee.”
…
31. The following decisions of this Court, the act of
obtaining a benefit reserved for designated
castes, tribes and classes by an individual who
does not belong to the designated community on
the basis of a false caste claim, has been held to
constitute an egregious violation, even a fraud on
the Constitution:
31.1. In Anjan Kumar v. Union of India, (2006) 3 SCC
257 this Court held that : (SCC p. 265, para 14)
______________
Page 31 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.‘14. … A person not belonging to the
Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes
claiming himself to be a member of such
caste by procuring a bogus caste
certificate is a fraud under the
Constitution of India. The impact of
procuring fake/bogus caste certificate
and obtaining appointment/admission
from the reserved quota will have far-
reaching grave consequences. The
meritorious reserved candidate may be
deprived of reserved category for whom
the post is reserved. The reserved post
will go into the hand of non-deserving
candidate and in such cases it would be
violative of the mandate of Articles 14 and
21 of the Constitution.’31.2. In State of Maharashtra v. Ravi Prakash
Babulalsing Parmar, (2007) 1 SCC 80, this Court
observed thus : (SCC p. 89, para 23)
‘23. The makers of the Constitution laid
emphasis on equality amongst citizens. The
Constitution of India provides for protective
discrimination and reservation so as to enable
the disadvantaged group to come on the same
platform as that of the forward community. If
______________
Page 32 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.and when a person takes an undue
advantage of the said beneficent provision
of the Constitution by obtaining the
benefits of reservation and other benefits
provided under the Presidential Order
although he is not entitled thereto, he not
only plays a fraud on the society but in
effect and substance plays a fraud on the
Constitution. When, therefore, a
certificate is granted to a person who is
not otherwise entitled thereto, it is
entirely incorrect to contend that the
State shall be helpless spectator in the
matter.’31.3. Similar observations are contained in the
judgment of this Court in Central Bank of
India v. Madhulika Guruprasad Dahir, (2008) 13 SCC
170: (SCC p. 176, para 14)
‘14. … It would suffice to state that except
in a few decisions, where the admission/
appointment was not cancelled because of
peculiar factual matrix obtaining therein,
the consensus of judicial opinion is that
equity, sympathy or generosity has no
place where the original appointment
rests on a false caste certificate. A person
______________
Page 33 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.who enters the service by producing a
false caste certificate and obtains
appointment to the post meant for a
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or
OBC, as the case may be, deprives a
genuine candidate falling in either of the
said categories, of appointment to that
post, does not deserve any sympathy or
indulgence of this Court. He who comes to
the Court with a claim based on falsity
and deception cannot plead equity nor the
Court would be justified to exercise equity
jurisdiction in his favour.’
…
47. The backdrop for the decision in Madhuri
Patil v. Commr., Tribal Development, (1994) 6 SCC
241, was provided by the significant scale on which
benefits were secured by imposters by passing
themselves off as members of castes, tribes and
classes for whom reservations have been earmarked
pursuant to constitutional provisions. By its directions,
which this Court issued on 2.9.1994, provision was
made for the constitution of committees for verification
of claims belonging to a designated caste, tribe or
class. This Court explained the modalities to be
followed by the Scrutiny Committees and the manner
in which action would be taken if a claim was found to
______________
Page 34 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.be false. The directions which were issued by this
Court envisaged that upon a claim being found to
be false or spurious:
47.1. the Caste Scrutiny Committee should pass an
order cancelling and confiscating the certificate;
47.2. the cancellation of the certificate should be
communicated to the educational institution where the
candidate has been admitted or to the appointing
authority where the candidate is employed;
47.3. upon this, the head of the institution or the
appointing authority should cancel the admission
or appointment without further notice and debar
the candidate from further study or continuance
in office; and47.4. a prosecution should be launched against
the candidate or, as the case may be, the parents
or guardians responsible for making the false
claim.
…
69. For these reasons, we hold and declare that:
______________
Page 35 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.69.1. The directions which were issued by the
Constitution Bench of this Court in para 38 of the
decision in State of Maharashtra v. Milind, (2001) 1
SCC 4, were in pursuance of the powers vested in this
Court under Article 142 of the Constitution;
69.2. Since the decision of this Court in Madhuri
Patil v. Commr., Tribal Development, (1994) 6 SCC
241, which was rendered on 2-9-1994, the regime
which held the field in pursuance of those directions
envisaged a detailed procedure for:
(a) the issuance of caste certificates;
(b) scrutiny and verification of caste and tribe
claims by Scrutiny Committees to be
constituted by the State Government;
(c) the procedure for the conduct of
investigation into the authenticity of the claim;
(d) Cancellation and confiscation of the caste
certificate where the claim is found to be false
or not genuine;
(e) Withdrawal of benefits in terms of the
termination of an appointment, cancellation of
an admission to an educational institution or
disqualification from an electoral office
obtained on the basis that the candidate
belongs to a reserved category; and
(f) Prosecution for a criminal offence.
______________
Page 36 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
69.3. The decisions of this Court in R. Vishwanatha
Pillai v. State of Kerala, (2004) 2 SCC 105 and in Union
of India v. Dattatray, (2008) 4 SCC 612, which were
rendered by Benches of three Judges laid down the
principle of law that where a benefit is secured by
an individual – such as an appointment to a post
or admission to an educational institution — on
the basis that the candidate belongs to a
reserved category for which the benefit is
reserved, the invalidation of the caste or tribe
claim upon verification would result in the
appointment or, as the case may be, the
admission being rendered void or non est.
69.4. The exception to the above doctrine was in those
cases where this Court exercised its power under
Article 142 of the Constitution to render complete
justice;
69.5. By Maharashtra Act 23 of 2001 there is a
legislative codification of the broad principles
enunciated in Madhuri Patil. The legislation provides a
statutory framework for regulating the issuance of
caste certificates (Section 4); constitution of Scrutiny
Committees for verification of claims (Section 6);
submission of applications for verification of caste
______________
Page 37 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
certificates [Sections 6(2) and 6(3)]; cancellation of
caste certificates (Section 7); burden of proof
(Section 8); withdrawal of benefits obtained upon the
invalidation of the claim (Section 10); and initiation of
prosecution (Section 11), amongst other things;
69.6. The power conferred by Section 7 upon the
Scrutiny Committee to verify a claim is both in respect
of caste certificates issued prior to and subsequent to
the enforcement of the Act on 18-10-2001. Finality
does not attach to a caste certificate (or to the claim to
receive benefits) where the claim of the individual to
belong to a reserved caste, tribe or class is yet to be
verified by the Scrutiny Committee;
69.7. Withdrawal of benefits secured on the basis
of a caste claim which has been found to be false
and is invalidated is a necessary consequence
which flows from the invalidation of the caste
claim and no issue of retrospectivity would arise;
69.8. The decisions in Kavita Solunke v. State of
Maharashtra, (2012) 8 SCC 430, and Shalini v. New
English High School Assn., (2013) 16 SCC 526, of two
learned Judges are overruled. Shalini v. New English
High School Assn., (2013) 16 SCC 526, insofar as it
stipulates a requirement of a dishonest intent for the
______________
Page 38 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
application of the provision of Section 10 is, with
respect, erroneous and does not reflect the correct
position in law;
69.9. Mens rea is an ingredient of the penal provisions
contained in Section 11. Section 11 is prospective and
would apply in those situations where the act
constituting the offence has taken place after the date
of its enforcement;
69.10. The judgment of the Full Bench of the Bombay
High Court in Arun v. State of Maharashtra, 2014 SCC
OnLine Bom 4595, is manifestly erroneous and is
overruled; and
69.11. Though the power of the Supreme Court under
Article 142 of the Constitution is a constitutional power
vested in the court for rendering complete justice and
is a power which is couched in wide terms, the exercise
of the jurisdiction must have due regard to legislative
mandate, where a law such as Maharashtra Act 23 of
2001 holds the field.”
[emphasis supplied]
9. While the petitioners rely on Kanishk Sinha (supra) to argue
that procedural changes, such as the creation of Scrutiny
______________
Page 39 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
Committees, are prospective, this argument misses the mark. The
substantive law that fraud vitiates all subsequent actions has always
been the law of the land. Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) did not
create a new offence, it merely provided an administrative forum to
uncover preexisting and ongoing frauds. A false certificate
presented before 1995 is just as fraudulent and void as one
presented after 1995.
10. The petitioners’ reliance on the prospective restructuring
of procedures is fundamentally flawed. As established in Dayaram
(supra), Scrutiny Committees were specifically empowered to carry
out the verification of community certificates that had been
routinely issued without prior inquiry, such as those granted by
Tahsildars on mere self-affidavits. The relevant observation made in
Dayaram (supra) is reproduced hereunder:
“36. Having regard to the scheme for verification
formulated by this Court in Madhuri Patil the
Scrutiny Committees carry out verification of
caste certificates issued without prior enquiry, as
for example, the caste certificates issued by
Tahsildars or other officers of the departments of______________
Page 40 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.Revenue/Social Welfare/Tribal Welfare, without
any enquiry or on the basis of self-affidavits
about caste. If there were to be a legislation
governing or regulating grant of caste certificates, and
if caste certificates are issued after due and proper
inquiry, such caste certificates will not call for
verification by the Scrutiny Committees. Madhuri
Patil provides for verification only to avoid false
and bogus claims. The said scheme and the
directions therein have been satisfactorily
functioning for the last one-and-a-half decades.
If there are any shortcomings, the Government
can always come up with an appropriate
legislation to substitute the said scheme. We see
no reason why the procedure laid down in Madhuri
Patil [(1994) 6 SCC 241 : 1994 SCC (L&S) 1349 :
(1994) 28 ATC 259] should not continue in the absence
of any legislation governing the matter.”
[emphasis supplied]
11. Since fraud unravels everything, the date of 1995 holds no
magical immunity. Both Dayaram (supra) and Food Corporation of
India (supra) affirm that the verification mechanism applies
continuously to any unchecked or disputed certificate relied upon by
a candidate to secure or enjoy a reserved vacancy. A false
______________
Page 41 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
representation made in prior to 1995 does not metamorphose into a
legal truth simply because it escaped detection until the employee’s
retirement.
12. We find ourselves in agreement with the majority view of
the Coordinate Bench in V.Perumal (supra) and the decision in
C.Arumugam v. The Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-II 15.
The Benches in those matters correctly applied the absolute
mandates of the Supreme Court in Dayaram (supra) and Food
Corporation of India (supra). They accurately concluded that neither
a pre-1995 appointment/certificate date nor the superannuation of
an employee functions as a statutory bar to verifying community
credentials. When a public benefit is claimed on a false baseline, the
verification process must be brought to its logical end. In fact, we
endorse the following observations of the Division Bench in
C.Arumugam (supra):
“31. … In this regard, the binding effect of the
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been
considered by a Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Commissioner of Central Excise,15 Order dated 12.4.2024 in W.P.No.9995 of 2021 etc.
______________
Page 42 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.Bolpur v. Ratan Melting and Wire Industries reported in
(2008) 13 SCC 1, to hold as follows
‘7. Circulars and instructions issued by the
Board are no doubt binding in law on the
authorities under the respective statutes,
but when the Supreme Court or the High
Court declares the law on the question
arising for consideration, it would not be
appropriate for the Court to direct that the
circular should be given effect to and not
the view expressed in a decision of this
Court or the High Court. So far as the
clarifications/circulars issued by the
Central Government and of the State
Government are concerned they represent
merely their understanding of the
statutory provisions. They are not binding
upon the court. It is for the Court to
declare what the particular provision of
statute says and it is not for the
Executive. Looked at from another angle,
a circular which is contrary to the
statutory provisions has really no
existence in law.’
32. When the Hon’ble Supreme Court has rendered a
judgment which is reiterated in several judgments of______________
Page 43 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.the Hon’ble Supreme Court, there cannot be an
Office Memorandum which would whittle down
the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court which is
binding as a law declared in terms of Article 141
of the Constitution. When the judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court is binding not only as a
precedent, but as a law declared, there cannot be
an official instruction on the interpretation of the
judgment so as to limit its operation. This is the
mischief that was done by way of the Office
Memorandum dated 24.12.2020.
33. Therefore, this Court is unable to agree with
the submission of the learned counsels appearing
for the petitioners that there cannot be
verification of Community Certificates which were
obtained prior to 1995. Equally, merely because
appointment was before 1995, it cannot be said
that verification in those cases cannot be done,
as rightly pointed out by Hon’ble Mrs. Justice
N.Mala while expressing dissenting view that this
Court cannot declare or legitimise fraud
committed by a person merely because he
obtained the false certificate or got employment
based on a false claim before 1995. It is settled
that fraud vitiates every solemn transaction and
there cannot be a legal sanction to condone fraud______________
Page 44 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.if it is committed before 1995. Therefore,
irrespective of date of Community Certificate or
date of appointment before or after 1995,
verification as to the genuineness of Community
Certificate or claim as to one’s community status
shall continue to its logical end.”
[emphasis supplied]
13. Consequently, the contrary views articulated in S.R.
Krishnakumari (supra) and N.Vasugi v. The Chairman, State Level
Scrutiny Committee-III16 cannot be sustained as good law. The
proposition that an inquiry into the genuineness of a community
certificate lapses or becomes impermissible post-retirement simply
because the delay might be attributable to the employer runs
completely counter to the Supreme Court’s strict mandate that
‘fraud unravels everything’. That apart, allowing employees to draw
pension upon giving an undertaking that their progeny would never
claim the social reservation benefits runs athwart the decisions of
the Supreme Court. Allowing administrative delay or retirement to
permanently immunize a fraudulent entry into service would result
in a grave constitutional failure, leaving stolen public reservations
16 Order dated 5.6.2025 in W.P.No.20002 of 2025
______________
Page 45 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
completely unchecked. The decisions in S.R.Krishnakumari (supra)
and N.Vasugi (supra) are hereby explicitly overruled.
14. The judgments of the Supreme Court in R.Sundaram;
S.Renuka; SLP (C) No.14135 of 2024; SLP (C) No.13456 of 2024;
SLP (C) Diary No.1323 of 2023 (all referred to supra), are delivered
by Two-Judge Benches of the Supreme Court without reference to
the Three-Judge Bench decision in Food Corporation of India and
others (supra) and in light of the proposition of law enunciated in
Food Corporation of India and others (supra), we hold that the five
aforesaid decisions of the Supreme Court, are distinguishable.
15. Applying the binding Supreme Court propositions to the
questions referred to us, this Full Bench rules as follows:
(1) Question (a) is answered in the Affirmative:
Verification into the genuineness of a community
certificate or caste status of an employee remains
legally permissible even after their retirement from
service. Since an appointment obtained by fraud is
ab initio void, retirement does not wash away the
______________
Page 46 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.foundational illegality, and retiral benefits flowing
from a void entry cannot be protected.
(2) Question (b) is answered in the Affirmative:
The employers and Scrutiny Committees are fully
empowered to verify the genuineness of a
community certificate or caste status, irrespective of
whether the certificate was issued or the
employment was granted prior to the year 1995.
Fraud has no expiry date, and the procedural
mechanics established vide Kumari Madhuri Patil
(supra) in 1994 do not grant immunity to older
deceptions.
(3) Question (c) is answered in the Affirmative:
A lawful verification process into an employee’s caste
status initiated prior to retirement does not lapse
upon superannuation and must be permitted to
continue to its logical conclusion. To hold otherwise
______________
Page 47 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.would allow dilatory tactics to defeat constitutional
accountability.
DIRECTIVES TO THE STATE:
16. While the law must take its course, we cannot tolerate the
use of delayed procedures as a dangling sword or an engine of
unnecessary harassment. To balance constitutional integrity with
fairness, we issue the following directives:
(a) The State Government is directed to immediately
fortify the State Level Scrutiny Committees and
District Level Vigilance Committees with adequate
manpower and anthropological experts. This
institutional strengthening must be targeted at
eliminating massive systemic backlogs and ensuring
rigid, strict compliance with the multi-point
verification matrix established in Kumari Madhuri
Patil (supra).
(b) All public employers are directed to initiate and
complete the verification of community certificates
______________
Page 48 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.within the initial years of an employee’s service,
rather than waiting until the fag end of their career
or after retirement.
(c) In cases where inquiries are pursued post-
retirement, they must be conducted on a fast-track,
day-to-day basis and completed within a maximum
period of two months to avoid keeping pensionary
benefits suspended indefinitely.
(d) The State shall not accept simple undertakings,
such as promising that the employee’s progeny will
not claim future reservation benefits, as a
mechanism to preserve accrued retiral benefits or
insulate careers built on active misrepresentation.
Allowing a candidate to retain benefits stolen from
genuine marginalized individuals is legally untenable
and equivalent to allowing a thief to retain stolen
property.
______________
Page 49 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.
The reference stands answered accordingly. The Registry is
directed to place the individual writ petitions before the appropriate
roster bench for disposal on merits.
(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CJ)
(K.KUMARESH BABU, J.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.)
30.07.2026
Index : Yes
Neutral Citation : Yes
Note to Registry:
Mark a copy of this order to the
Chief Secretary, Government of
Tamil Nadu, for taking requisite
steps with dispatch.
sasi
______________
Page 50 of 51https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23827 of 2025 etc.THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
K.KUMARESH BABU,J.
AND
G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.
(sasi)
W.P.No.23827, 23854, 23885 of 2025; 8080 of 2019;
12549 of 2021; 25276, 25277 of 2012 and 492 of 2023
30.07.2026
______________
Page 51 of 51
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
