Madras HC Orders Probe into Fake Disability Certificates Used for Job Appointments in Tamil Nadu
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has ordered a comprehensive inquiry into the appointment of several individuals under the priority category using fake disability certificates in town panchayats and municipalities in Tirunelveli district. Justice B. Pugalendhi directed the Secretary to the Labour Welfare and Skill Development Department to form a committee of senior officers to investigate how candidates were sponsored by the District Employment Exchange for these appointments.
The court's order comes after it was revealed that between 2005 and 2015, numerous persons obtained temporary positions such as sanitary workers, overhead tank operators, watchmen, electricians, and junior assistants using forged disability certificates. The committee is tasked with examining the sponsorship process and recommending disciplinary action against officials found responsible.
The court also instructed the Secretary to review the existing mechanism for sponsorship through Employment Exchanges and implement safeguards to ensure compliance with government orders, proper verification of records, and greater accountability. The entire process must be completed within six weeks.
The case originated from a complaint filed in 2015 by Dr V. Chandrasekaran, a Civil Assistant Surgeon, who noticed a fake National Disability Card bearing his forged signature and seal. An FIR was registered, and a subsequent medical examination of all candidates appointed under the priority quota found that only 25 out of 103 individuals were genuinely differently abled.
The investigation was later transferred to the CB-CID, Tirunelveli, which uncovered an organised fraud involving brokers and officials from town panchayats and municipalities. Forensic analysis revealed that 13 government doctors had issued false medical certificates, enabling individuals to obtain National Disability Identity cards. As of now, 187 individuals have been identified as accused in the case.
The court was hearing petitions from those recruited on a temporary basis who challenged show cause notices, disciplinary proceedings, and termination orders. The petitions argued that the appointments were made through the District Employment Exchange, which had listed them as differently abled under the priority quota. The court's directive aims to address the systemic lapses that allowed such fraud to occur.
