Kerala High Court
Ammu Ramakrishnan vs Kerala Veterinary And Animal Sciences ... on 16 June, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2017/17TH CHAITHRA, 1939
WP(C).No. 11603 of 2015 (A)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
AMMU RAMAKRISHNAN,
RAGAM, NELLIKKAL,
MUNDAKKAL EAST, KOLLAM-691001.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI
SRI.N.NISHAM
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. KERALA VETERINARY AND ANIMAL SCIENCES UNIVERSITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
POOKODE, LAKKIDI P.O WAYANAD - 673 576.
2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR,
KERALA VETERINARY AND ANIMAL SCIENCES UNIVERSITY
POOKODE, LAKKIDI P.O WAYANAD - 673 576.
3. DR.DEEPTHI LEELAMANI,
W/O.ARUN JOHN, THOTTAPPALLI VEEDU, TENSE,
VIDYANAGAR, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR - 680 654.
R1-R2 BY ADV. SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF, SC
R3 BY ADVS. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J.
SRI.K.R.GANESH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 07-04-2017, ALONG WITH WPC. 28935/2015, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
SKG
WP(C).No. 11603 of 2015 (A)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.KVASU/GA/A/1648/2014(X)
DTD.1/1/15 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER
EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE RANKED LIST DTD.11/2/15 PUBLISHED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.NIL SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM.
EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD.31/3/2015 IN
WPC.10394/15.
EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE BAPTISM CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 3RD
RESPONDENT BY ST.ANTONY'S CHURCH, MANNUTHY
EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE
3RD RESPONDENT AND HER HUSBAND BY THE ST.ANTONY'S
CHURCH, MANNUTHY
EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 16.6.2014 ISSUED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 7.7.2014 SUBMITTED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
OBTAINED UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.
EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNITY AND NON CREAMY LAYER
CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY TAHSILDAR,
KOLLAM
EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF TH APPOINTMENT LETTER
NO.KVASU/GA/A/1648/1(ii) DATED 7.3.2015 APPOINTING 3RD
RESPONDENT AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B7-6931/15 DATED 14.09.2015
ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, KOLLAM
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
----------------------- NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.S. TO JUDGE
SKG
C.R.
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of April, 2017
JUDGMENT
The issues impelled for consideration in these two writ petitions are interplaited to one another and the reliefs to be granted in one would depend upon the reliefs sought for in the other. It is therefore, only idoneous that the writ petitions be considered and disposed of jointly and I do so. For the sake of convenience I treat WP(C) No.28935 of 2015 as a lead case and all reference in this judgment to parties and documents will be as per the status available in the said writ petition.
2. I have heard Sri.S. Mohammed Al Rafi, the learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.11603/2015, Sri.Elvin Peter P.J., the learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.28935 of 2015, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the official respondents in both the cases and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Veterinary WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 2 University.
3. The petitioner was born into the Ezhava Community, which is one that is listed as an Other Backward Class Community in the relevant Statutes and Regulations. She married her husband, who belongs to the Christian faith, by causing herself to be converted by going through the process of Baptism and through religious rites, as are mandated for conversion to the faith of Christianity. However, after marriage and within a few days she asserts that she reconverted to the Ezhava Community and she has produced Ext.P3 Certificate alleged to be issued by the SNDP Branch, Kollam certifying her reconversion, as also Ext.P2, which she claims is the Marriage Certificate issued by the SNDP Yogam, Kollam, under which she and her husband had conducted their marriage as per the customary rites applicable to Ezhavas. In essence, the petitioner asserts that she is no longer a Christian and that she had reconverted to the Ezhava Community, thus being entitled to all benefits under the various applicable Government Orders relating to employment under the Government.
4. Sri.Elvin Peter, appearing for the petitioner refers to the WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 3 judgments of this Court reported in Rajamani v. State of Kerala [2014 (1) KLT 27] to contend that even if a person converts to the Christian faith, since he or she was born into a Community which had suffered several social inequities and disadvantages, such caste status does not get altered and that such person would be entitled to all benefits accruing from the fact of the birth of that person in an OBC Community. He also cites Kerala Pattikajathi Samrakshana Samithi and Another v. State of Kerala and Others [ILR 1995 (3) Kerala (1)] to assert that the caste of a person is determined by his or her birth and that, there is no further scope for change in the status of caste. He says that the judgment is clear that a caste is classified as a backward class for the purpose of reservation and that the adoption, marriage and conversion of faith of an individual from one caste to the other has no relevance for the purpose of claiming the benefit of reservation under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India.
5. Further submissions of Sri.Elvin Peter is on the foundations of two other judgments namely Principal, Guntoor Medical College, Guntoor and Others [(1976) 3 SCC 411] WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 4 and Kailash Sonkar v. Smt. Maya Devi [(1989) 2 SCC 91]. He relies on these judgments to maintain that even conversion to the Christian faith would not robe the person of his vested right to be considered as a member of a backward Community or of an SC/ST Community and that all benefits flowing from the factum of his having taken birth in such a Community would apply, notwithstanding such conversion. He says that this is more so in the case of persons, who are reconverted. According to him, therefore, on reconversion of a person, the period during which he/she remains in a different faith remain as an eclipsed period, during which time he or she would not get the benefits, but when the reconversion happens, the eclipse is removed and he or she will thereafter obtain the benefits as was available prior to conversion.
6. I notice that the hypostasis of the petitioner's submissions are Exts.P2 & P3 Certificates issued by the SNDP Yogam, Kollam. Sri.Elvin Peter says that these two Certificates have been issued by the SNDP Yogam, because there is no other agency approved by the Government of Kerala, under which such re-conversions are authorised and permitted, especially in the WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 5 case of Backward Communities. He says that once those Certificates are issued by the SNDP Yogam, the same should enure to her benefit and he relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court K.P. Manu v. Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Community Certificate [(2015) 4 SCC 1], wherein the ratio declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is as under:
"42. Be it stated here that the said "Sangham" has been recognised as one of the agencies by the Government of Kerala as a competent organisation to issue the community certificate. There is no doubt that the appellant had converted himself and thereafter was accepted by the community. He has been taken within its fold.
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
51. In the instant case, the appellant got married to a Christian lady and that has been held against him. It has also been opined that he could not produce any evidence to show that he has been accepted by the community for leading the life of a Hindu. As far as the marriage and leading of Hindu life are concerned, we are of the convinced opinion that, in the instant case, it really cannot be allowed to make any difference. The community which is a recognised organisation by the State Government, has granted the certificate in categorical terms in favour of the appellant. It is the community which has the final say as far as acceptance is concerned, for it accepts the person, on reconversion, and takes him within its fold. Therefore, we are inclined to hold that the appellant after reconversion had come within the fold of the WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 6 community and thereby became a member of the Scheduled Caste. Had the community expelled him the matter would have been different. The acceptance is in continuum. Ergo, the reasonings ascribed by the Scrutiny Committee which have been concurred with by the High Court are wholly unsustainable."
7. Au contraire, Sri.S. Mohammed Al Rafi, the learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.11603/2015, who is a rival claimant for a Government employment, relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kailash Sonkar v. Smt. Maya Devi [AIR 1984 SC 600] and invites my attention to paragraphs 26, 27 & 30 of the said judgment. Their Lordships have lucidly settled the law that normally the caste to which a Hindu belongs is essentially determined by birth but that if a Hindu converts to Christianity or to any other Religion, which does not recognise the caste system, such conversion would amount to loss of the status of caste. Their Lordships went on to say that when a person belonging to the Scheduled Caste is converted to Christianity or to Islam, the same involves loss of the caste, unless the Religion to which he/she is converted, is liberal enough to permit the convertee to retain his caste and that where the new Religion does not accept or believe in caste WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 7 system, the loss of caste status would be final and complete. Their Lordships' view on this issue is available in paragraph 30 of the judgment, which makes very interesting reading and therefore, is extracted for a full reading:
"30. In our opinion, the main test should be a genuine intention of the reconvert to abjure his new religion and completely dissociate himself from it. We must hasten to add here that this does not mean that the reconversion should be only a ruse or a pretext or a cover to gain mundane worldly benefits so that the reconversion becomes merely a show for achieving a particular purpose whereas the real intention may be shrouded in mystery. The reconvert must exhibit a clear and genuine intention to go back to his old fold and adopt the customs and practices of the said fold without any protest from members of his erstwhile caste. In order to judge this factor, it is not necessary that there should be a direct or conclusive proof of the expression of the views of the community of the erstwhile caste and it would be sufficient compliance of this condition if no exception or protest is lodged by the community members, in which case the caste would revive on the reconversion of the person to his old religion."
8. In the case at hand, Sri.Elvin Peter's client was admittedly born as an Ezhava. She converted herself to Christianity, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, only for the purpose of marrying her husband, who follows the Christian faith. He maintains that this client did not intend to WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 8 relinquish her caste as a Hindu and he says it was, therefore, that she reconverted herself into the Ezhava fold. It is on such basis that she approached the SNDP Yogam, being without any other option, since there is no other agency authorised to permit such reconversion and to obtain Ext.P3 Caste Certificate, after having conducted a customary marriage with her husband under the aegis of the SNDP Yogam. In short, Sri.Elvin Peter asserts that reconversion of his client was complete and irrevocable. According to him, therefore, except the period during which she continued in the Christian faith, which period would stand eclipsed for the purpose of caste benefits, she would be entitled to all benefits for the period during which she continued as an Ezhava prior to the conversion and post reconversion.
9. The submissions of Sri.Elvin Peter may look lustrous at first glance, but looses its sheen if one examines the facts from the touch point of the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the various decisions above. The law that has been unambiguously declared is that the primary test should be the genuine intention of the reconvert to abjure his new religion and to completely dissociate himself from it. Their Lordships have WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 9 been very categoric that reconversion should not be a ruse or a pretext or a cover to gain benefits so that reconversion becomes merely a stratagem for achieving a particular purpose.
10. In order to examine it the petitioner had, in fact, reconverted to the Ezhava caste and whether her intention to do so was genuine, I had earlier directed the petitioner to produce on record the Community Certificate or the Birth Certificate of her child. The same has, however, not been brought on record, but Sri.Elvin Peter fairly concedes that in the Birth Certificate of the client's daughter she has been shown as a Christian.
11. I have pointedly considered all the factors that have been presented before me in this case. I am certain in my mind that the petitioner, in order to claim the benefits of a reconversion, will have to first establish such factum and also show that she has, after the alleged reconversion, abjured Christianity and that she is living as an Ezhava under the rigor of the social circumstances prevalent in such Community.
12. In the factual scenario available before me, unfortunately I do not find any material to prove either of the above. There is nothing on record to show conclusively that the WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 10 petitioner has reconverted, except Exts.P2 & P3, which I must say is not issued by a legally competent entity. Of course I note Sri.Elvin Peter's submission that there is no Agency authorised by the Government of Kerala to cause reconversion into a Backward Community. This may be true and if that be so, the burden becomes higher on the petitioner to prove that she has reconverted. Unfortunately, as has been admitted by Sri.Elvin Peter, even the petitioner's daughter continues to be a Christian and obviously therefore, the intention of the petitioner becomes explicit from such factum. It will a very difficult proposition to believe that the husband and daughter remains Christians and that the petitioner alone has reconverted as an Ezhava and that she remains, continues and lives like an Ezhava. I think this is too farfetched and I suspect this is one of those cases which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has described to be a pretext or ruse or a facade for the purpose of mundane worldly pursuits.
13. In such circumstances and being governed by the binding precedents of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, I dismiss WP (C) No.28935 of 2015 and axiomatically allow the reliefs sought for by the petitioner in WP(C) No.11603 of 2015. WP(C) Nos.11603 & 28935 of 2015 11
14. Consequentially, the petitioner in WP(C) No.28935 of 2015 cannot claim further continuance in the post of Assistant Professor [Animal Production, Gynecology and Obstetrics] in the 1st respondent University and the University will be obligated to consider the claim of the petitioner in WP(C) No.11603 of 2015 for such post in accordance with the applicable Statutes Rules and Regulations governing such appointment.
These writ petitions are thus ordered as above. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, I make no order as to costs and I direct the parties to suffer their respective costs.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE.
//True Copy// P.A to Judge sp/20/04/17