VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

A.Albert Rajkumar v. The Union of India

DISMISSED WITH COST
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
8 July 2026
Bench
P.Velmurugan, S Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi
Case no.
WP 26182/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow P.VelmuruganFollow S Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi

Judgment

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by P.Velmurugan J.) This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to complete the pending verification proceedings relating to the social status/community certificate of the 4th respondent and submit its final report to the 1st and 3rd respondents within such time as may be fixed by this Court.

¶2According to the petitioner, the 4th respondent secured appointment in the Department of Telecommunications in the year 1991 by falsely claiming Scheduled caste (Hindu Adi Dravida) Status based on a community certificate dated 19.09.1988.

¶3Mr. K. Surendar, Government Counsel who takes notice for the respondents 2 and 3 submits that earlier also the petitioner had approached this Court by way of filing an application in W.P.No.3068 of 2024 seeking direction to the Chairman, National Commission for Scheduled Castes, New Delhi to take action against the 4th respondent herein by verifying his community certificate status and this Court by order dated 12.02.2024 dismissed the said petition with the following direction; Page3 of 5

¶7However, the 5th respondent/District Collector may conduct an enquiry as to the genuineness of the Community Certificate of the 8th respondent in C.A.No.6359/88-A, dated 19.09.1988, after giving due opportunity to the 8th respondent, and pass appropriate orders, and it is not necessary that the petitioner should be given any opportunity while deciding the genuineness of the Community Certificate submitted by the 8th respondent while security employment. Accordingly, the District Collector conducted enquiry and subsequently, cancelled the Community Certificate issued to the 4th respondent herein. Therefore, the relief sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition has become infructuous and nothing survives for further adjudication.

¶4Recording the submissions of the learned Government Counsel, this Writ Petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to be paid by the petitioner to the credit of "The Chief Justice Relief Fund, Madras High Court". (P.V.,J.) (K.G.T.,J.) 08-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order KSA-2 Page4 of 5 To

¶1The Secretary Department of Telecommunications Government of India, Sanchar bhavan 20, Ashoka Road, New Delhi-110 001

¶2The Member secretary District Level Vigilance committee Office of the District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer, Chennai District, Chennai-600 001

¶3The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai City Police Vepery, Chennai-600 007

¶4The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras WPoNo.o26182oofo2026 P.VELMURUGAN,oJ. AND K.GOVINDARAJANoTHILAKAVADI,oJ. KSA-2 WPoNo.o26182oofo2026 08-07-2026 Page5oofo5

Case details

Parties and counsel

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P. VELMURUGAN AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI A.Albert Rajkumar S/o.Anandha Sundaram Ground Floor, No.178, 1st street Y-Block, Anna Nagar Chennai-600 040 ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Union Of India Rep by the Secretary Department of Telecommunications Government of India, Sanchar Bhavan, 20, Ashoka Road New Delhi-110 001 2. The Member Secretary District Level Vigilance Committee Office of the District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer, Chennai District Chennai-600 001 3. The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai City Police Vepery, Chennai-600 007 4. S.Sudhakar @ Simon Sudhakar S/o.M.Sambandam No.893, J-Block, 18th Street Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 040 ..Respondent(s) Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to complete the pending Page2 of 5 verification proceedings concerning the 4th respondent and submit its final report to the 1st and 3rd respondents within such time as may be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner(s): Mr. Anish Gopi For Respondent(s): Mr. K. Surendar, Govt. Counsel for R2 and R3

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.