(Order of the Court by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.,) Heard Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.S.Chandrasekar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 3, Mr.K.K.Senthil, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and carefully perused the materials placed on record.
2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order, dated 14.05.2010, passed by the first respondent, in and by which, the petitioner's Community Certificate certifying that he belongs to ?Hindu Archakara Vellalar Community? has been cancelled.
3. The first and foremost ground raised by the writ petitioner is with regard to the jurisdiction of the first respondent to pass such an order of cancellation. It is submitted that in terms of G.O.(2D) No.108, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare (CV-I) Department, dated 12.09.2007, which was passed by the State Government after the directions issued by the Honourable Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil and another vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and others, District Level Vigilance Committee and State Level Scrutiny Committee were constituted to verify the genuineness of the Community Certificate issued as Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribes and the said Committee could not have tested the correctness of the petitioner's Community Certificate, which has been issued certifying that he belongs to ?Hindu Archakara Vellalar Community?.
4. On perusal of the Government Order, in G.O.(2D) No.108, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare (CV-I) Department, dated 12.09.2007, it is clear that the first respondent / District Vigilance Committee has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. However, it appears that on a misreading of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the earlier round of litigation, the first respondent / District Vigilance Committee has taken such a decision.
5. The writ petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition in W.P.No.5378 of 1997, challenging the order of the District Collector cancelling his Community Certificate. The said writ petition was allowed by order, dated 15.10.2003. Subsequently, the third respondent / Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenkasi, passed an order dated 16.06.2005, which was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.5931 of 2005. The said writ petition was disposed of by directing the District Collector to proceed from the stage where it was left that the petitioner be furnished with all the necessary documents pertaining to the enquiry conducted and afford reasonable opportunity including personal hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Pursuant to the said directions, the impugned order, dated 14.05.2010, has been passed.
6. It is pertinent to note that if the District Collector alone is the competent authority to deal with the matter, then the matter should not have been dealt with by the District Level Vigilance Committee. This defect renders the impugned order as unsustainable.
7. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the report submitted by the third respondent / Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenkasi, dated 20.04.2010, referring to the petitioner's communal status.
8. Be that as it may, since the first respondent / District Vigilance Committee has no jurisdiction to deal with the petitioner's communal status and the District Collector alone is the competent authority, moreso as per the order, dated 02.09.2009, passed in the earlier round of litigation, we are inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the first respondent.
9. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order, dated 14.05.2010, passed by the first respondent is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the file of the District Collector, Tirunelveli, who shall independently conduct an enquiry in the matter by affording reasonable opportunity including personal hearing to the petitioner and take a decision in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
To:
1.The District Vigilance Committee, (Community Certificate Verification), Tirunelveli, rep.by its President cum District Collector, Tirunelveli.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenkasi, Tirunelveli District..