Officials who gave conwoman job to face action: HC

Chennai: On being informed that the process could not done because she was already working in the municipality, she checked and found that a woman was impersonating her in the office. She lodged a complaint with officials but, when they failed to take action, she filed a writ petition in the high court.
In his order, the single judge said that though her age was beyond the eligible limit for the Class IV job - which is between 18 and 30 years - the authorities allowed her to take up the post without any evidence.They accepted as proof a mere declaration and medical certificate. She managed to get the date of birth mentioned in the service register erased and altered to show that she was born in 1960 and had her educational qualifications changed to show that she was literate. Her father's name was noted as "Rengan" when in the sponsorship letter of the employment exchange, dated October 1, 1990 had the fraudulent candidate's husband's name, Palanisamy. "Therefore, there is absolutely no possibility to say that the entries have been inadvertently made in the service register. This court is of the view that Parvathi had impersonated the real Parvathi, and [she is] not entitled to continue in service," he said.
Pointing out that the genuine Parvathi had been deprived of her employment, and she had been litigating since 1997, the single judge said she should be given a suitable job within six weeks.
But the imposter would not give up. She filed an appeal against the ruling. Dismissing her appeal, a division bench of Justice R Sudhakar and Justice S Vaidyanathan said, "An imper- sonator cannot claim wages on the alleged act. The case requires proper investigation by law enforcement agencies to book culprits who are responsible [for] creating records, altering data, etc, thereby abetting impersonation."
The judges imposed a cost of Rs 10,000 on Parvathi for fraudulently occupying the post for 23 years, and said it should be given to Vidyasagar (formerly The Spastics Society of India) on or before June 7, 2016. They posted the matter to April 26 for compliance of the order.