Kerala High Court
Kumaraswamy Alias V.Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2017/9TH JYAISHTA, 1939
OP.No. 26232 of 2002 (W)
----------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
--------------------------
KUMARASWAMY ALIAS V.KUMAR,
AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.VENKITTARAMA NAIDU, RANI NIVAS,
KULLAN ROAD, MULLAKKAL, ALAPPUZHA.
BY ADVS. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR
SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE
RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, SCHEDULE CASTE/SCHEDULE
TRIBE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,,
TRIVANDRUM.
2. SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION OF
SC/ST CLAIMS, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.
3. KIRTADS,
REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, KOZHIKODE-17.
* ADDITIONAL R4 IMPLEADED
4. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,
CENTRAL OFFICE, ANNASALAI, CHENNAI.
* ADDITIONAL R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30.01.2003
IN C.M.P.NO. 352 OF 2002
R1 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SANTHOSH PETER
ADDL.R4 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL)
THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 24-03-2017, ALONG WITH O.P.NO. 10146 OF 2003, THE COURT
ON 30-05-2017 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Msd.
OP.No. 26232 of 2002 (W)
--------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 05/10/2000 SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS.
EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 13/08/2001.
EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 11/06/2002.
EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29/07/2002.
EXHIBIT P5- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF ASHOK KUMAR.
EXHIBIT P6- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE LAKSHMI PRIYA.
EXHIBIT P7- TRUE COPY OF TRANSFER CERTIFICATE OF MUNRAJATHI.
EXHIBIT P8- TRUE COPY OF SECONDARY SCHOOL CUMULATIVE RECORD OF
VENKITESHA BABU.
EXHIBIT P9- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF RAJASEKHARAN.
EXHIBIT P10- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF NARAYANI.
EXHIBIT P11- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF PUSHPALATHA.
EXHIBIT P12- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF KANJANA.
EXHIBIT P13- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF MUTHU RAJ.
EXHIBIT P14- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF NANDAKUMAR.
EXHIBIT P15- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT OF NANDAKUMAR.
EXHIBIT P16- TRUE COPY OF GRAVE YARD CERTIFICATE OF NARAYANASWAMY.
EXHIBIT P17- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF MURALI SAI.
EXHIBIT P18- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT OF MURALI SAI.
EXHIBIT P19- TRUE COPY OF TRANSFER CERTIFICATE OF DEVI DURGAVATHY.
EXHIBIT P20- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER
DATED 14/03/1980 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, AMBALAPUZHA.
EXHIBIT P21- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO
THE PETITIONER'S SON VARUNKUMAR.
EXHIBIT P22- TRUE COPY OF REGISTERED DOCUMENT DATED 28/01/1925 OF
SRO ARIPPUKOTTAI IN THE NAME OF MUTHUSWAMI.
OP.No. 26232 of 2002 (W)
--------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P22(A)-TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P22.
EXHIBIT P23- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF SARAVANAN
ISSUED BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, MADURAI NORTH.
EXHIBIT P24- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF THARUNI BALAN
ISSUED BY VILLAGE MUNSIFF.
EXHIBIT P25- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THARUNI BALAN
SUBMITTED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P26- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF KRISHNAMOORTHY
ISSUED BY ZONAL DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, ARUPPUKOTTAI.
EXHIBIT P27- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY KRISHNA MOORTHY
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P28- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY MRS.PRABHAVATHY
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P29- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF NARASIMHAN
ISSUED BY VILLAGE MUNSIFF.
EXHIBIT P30- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY NARASIMHAN SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P31- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT OF DHANALAXMI.
EXHIBIT P32- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF MANOHARAN
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P33- TRUE COPY OF CASTE CERTIFICATE OF PUNITHA LAKSHMY.
EXHIBIT P34- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY POTHIRAJ SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P35- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY DEVI W/O.POTHIRAJ
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P36- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF N.VINOD RAJ
ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, MADURAI.
EXHIBIT P37- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF N.VIMAL RAJ
ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, MADURAI.
EXHIBIT P38- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY MRS.KOMALAM.
EXHIBIT P39- TRUE COPY OF SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF
A.MANAVALA BABU PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P40- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF KUMARASWAMY.
OP.No. 26232 of 2002 (W)
--------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P41- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY A.M.BABU BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P42- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY A.GOVINDARAJAN
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P43- TRUE COPY OF CASTE CERTIFICATE OF POORNASWARY ISSUED
BY ZONAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, KARIAPETTY PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P44- TRUE COPY OF REGISTERED DOCUMENT DATED 10/02/1960 OF
SRO ARIPPUKOTTAI IN THE NAME OF KUPPUSWAMI.
EXHIBIT P44(A)-TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P44.
EXHIBIT P45- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF SMT.P.KAVITHA
ISSUED BY DY. TAHSILDAR, MADURAI NORTH TALUK.
EXHIBIT P46- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SMT.KAVITHA SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P47- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF SMT.GOMATHI
ISSUED BY DY.TAHSILDAR, MADURAI NORTH TALUK.
EXHIBIT P48- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY MR.N.PREMACHANDRAN
SUBMITTED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P49- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SMT.P.VIJAYALAKSHMI
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P50- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY VILLAGE
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, VIRUDHU NAGAR DATED 26/06/1987
OF P.RAJESH.
EXHIBIT P51- TRUE COPY OF CASTE CERTIFICATE TO RAJASEKHARAN.
EXHIBIT P52- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY RAJASEKHARAN BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P53- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF
MRS.R.PREMALATHA.
EXHIBIT P54- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY PREMALATHA SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P55- TRUE COPY OF SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF
RAJENDRAN.
EXHIBIT P56- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY RAJENDRAN SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
OP.No. 26232 of 2002 (W)
--------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P57- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY JAYALAKSHMY BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P58- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF
THE UMA MAHESWARY.
EXHIBIT P59- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWEARED BY UMA MAHESWARY.
EXHIBIT P60- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF R.VEERASWAMY.
EXHIBIT P61- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY VEERASWAMY BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P62- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SANTHA.
EXHIBIT P63- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY R.NARAYANAMOORTHY
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P64- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY T.R.PERUMAL BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P65- TRUE COPY OF CASTE CERTIFICATE OF SEETHA SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P66- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY RAMAKRISHNAN BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P67- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY LEKSHMY BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P68- TRUE COPY OF SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF
P.NARASIMHAN PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P69- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY NARASIMHAN BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P70- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY KALYANI BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P71- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY R.BALAKRISHNAN BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P72- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY KASTHURI PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P73- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY RAJAMMAL PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P74- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY R.VENKITESH PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
OP.No. 26232 of 2002 (W)
--------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P75- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY R.KRISHNAN PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P76- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY VASANTHA RANI
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P77- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY JAYANTHI PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P78- TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE R.NARAYANI
ISSUED BY TAHASILDAR, THIRUNELVALI.
EXHIBIT P79- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY K.NARAYANI.
EXHIBIT P80- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY R.LAXMI PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P81- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY R.PADMAVATHY PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P82- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY MADHUSOODHANAN
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P83- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY MRS.R.KANCHANA
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P84- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY MR.VENKIT PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P85- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY MR.VIJAYALAKSHMY
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P86- TRUE COPY OF CASTE CERTIFICATE OF B.SANJAY SUNDAR,
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P87- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SUBHARAYALU PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P88- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SEETHA PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P89- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF ASHOK KUMAR
ISSUED BY ZONAL DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, ARAPPUKOTTAI.
EXHIBIT P90- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY ASHOK KUMAR PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P91- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF LAKSHMI PRIYA
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P92- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY LAKSHMI PRIYA PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
OP.No. 26232 of 2002 (W)
--------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P93- TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF PRABHAKAR
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P94- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY PRABHAKAR PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P95- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY ANANTHAKRISHNAN
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P96- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY NAVANEETHAN PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P97- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY K.VASANTHA PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P98- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY K.SUSEELA PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P99- TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY PADMAVATHY PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P100-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY M.THULASIRAM
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P101-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SAROJINI PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P102-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY RENUKA PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P103-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY S.KANNAN PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P104-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY P.RAJALAKSHMY
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P105-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF RAJASEKHARAN
ISSUED BY ZONAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR.
EXHIBIT P106-TRUE COPY OF SECONDARY COMMUTATIVE RECORD OF
VENKITESH BABU.
EXHIBIT P107-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY RANGARAJAN PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P108-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY VENKTESH BABU
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P109-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY MUNNIAMMAL PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
OP.No. 26232 of 2002 (W)
--------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P110-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY PARVATHY PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P111-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SATHYANARANN
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P112-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY KANCHANA PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P113-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY LAKSHMI NARAYANAN
PRODUCED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P114-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY JANAKI RAM PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P115-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY ALAMELU PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P116-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SUBHARAYALU PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P117-TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SARADHA PRODUCED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P118-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF N.DEVI MEENAKSHI
ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, COIMBATORE.
EXHIBIT P119-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF
LATE N.KUMARASWAMY ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,
COIMBATORE.
EXHIBIT P120-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF
LAKSHMANA VIJAYAN ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,
ARIPUKOTTAI.
EXHIBIT P121-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF VEKINTARAMAN
ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, MADURAI SOUTH.
EXHIBIT P122-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF ALAMUPRIYA
ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, MADURAI SOUTH.
EXHIBIT P123-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE OF PRASANNA ISSUED
BY ZONAL DEPUTY TAHASILDAR.
EXHIBIT P124-TRUE COPY OF TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM LITTLE
FLOWER GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL MANNAPARAI OF
S.SHYAMA PADMAVATHY.
EXHIBIT P125-TRUE COPY OF TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM LITTLE
FLOWER GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL MANNAPARAI OF
S.SWARNA.
OP.No. 26232 of 2002 (W)
--------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P126-TRUE COPY OF TRANSFER CERTIFICATE OF L.SANTHI.
EXHIBIT P127- TRUE COPY OF TRANSFER CERTIFICATE OF L.INDRA GANDHI.
EXHIBIT P128-TRUE COPY OF CASTE CERTIFICATE OF LEKSHMY DEVI.
EXHIBIT P129-TRUE COPY OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL REPORT DATED 29/07/2000
SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE
THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATION.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
===============
OP No.26232 of 2002
&
10146 of 2003
===============
Dated this, the 30th day of May , 2017
J U D G M E N T
This original petition is filed challenging Exts.P3, P4 and P129 orders passed in the matter relating to a decision taken by the Scrutiny Committee for verification of SC/ST claims by virtue of powers conferred under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Since the contention urged in OP No.10146/2003 has direct bearing to the decision in OP No.26232/2002, both the cases are heard and decided together
2. The material facts that has led to the filing of OP No.26232/2002 are as under:-
Petitioner claims that he belongs to a Scheduled Caste Community namely "Gavara" which is included in the list published as per the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Amendment Act, 1976.
3. Petitioner's son Sri.Varun Kumar applied for admission to the Engineering/Medical and Agricultural Courses during the year OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:2:- 2000 under the SC/ST quota on the basis of certificate issued by Tahsildar. The application for Entrance Examination was scrutinized by the Commissioner of Entrance Examination who called for a report from the 3rd respondent, KIRTADS. On enquiry by KIRTADS, it was reported that petitioner's son belongs to "Gavara Naidu", a community popularly known as Naidu which is not a scheduled caste. Petitioner submitted a representation to the 1st respondent, State of Kerala narrating the difference between the communities Gavara and Naidu. As no steps were taken in the matter, OP No.31905/2000 was filed before this Court seeking for a direction to the 1st respondent to determine his caste pursuant to the representation submitted to Government. This Court directed the 1st respondent to dispose of Ext.P1 representation within 3 months. Pursuant to the same, the 2nd respondent, Scrutiny Committee for verification of SC/ST claims issued notice for personal hearing on 24/2/2001. Petitioner appeared through counsel and produced 36 documents. He further requested for time to produce more documents. Two witnesses were examined on 21/4/2001 and four witnesses were examined on 7/7/2001. On 7/7/2001, the 2nd respondent directed OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:3:- the petitioner to file affidavit of witnesses intended to be examined instead of producing them before the Committee and the case was posted for further evidence on 25/8/2001. Ext.P2 is the notice dated 13/8/2001 by which the case was posted on 25/8/2001. Petitioner filed affidavits of 83 witnesses and produced 22 documents. On 25/8/2001, the matter was not taken up for hearing, as there was no quorum. Petitioner was informed that the next posting date will be informed later. Thereafter, no notice of hearing was given. However, petitioner was served with order dated 11/6/2002 (Ext.P3). Pursuant to Ext.P3, the 1st respondent passed an order dated 29/7/2002 accepting Ext.P3.
4. The contention of the petitioner is that Ext.P3 has been issued in violation of the principles of natural justice without affording an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard. It is stated that none of the documents produced have been considered in the matter. According to the petitioner, the factual situation in the case which is narrated in paragraphs 10 to 30 of the original petition along with the affidavits and documents relied upon clearly establishes the fact that the petitioner belongs to Gavara community, which is a scheduled caste. Ext.P129 is the OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:4:- report of KIRTADS which had been relied upon by the 2nd respondent in order to arrive at a finding that the petitioner is not a scheduled caste.
5. Counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent wherein it is contended that Ext.P129, the enquiry report by KIRTADS has appended 75 documents and it is based on the findings in Ext.P129 that the Screening Committee rejected the SC (Gavara) claim of Sri.Varun Kumar and also rejected his claim for admission to professional courses under SC quota. It is further contended that the KIRTADS is the expert agency as defined under the Act and Ext.P129 enquiry report unequivocally presents the genealogical details of the petitioner. It is further contended that the Division Bench of this Court in a common judgment in WA No.879/1995 and connected cases considered the issue of the members of Naidu Community claiming Gavara/Kavara (SC) status. In the light of the judgment, the contention of the petitioner that the meaning of the word Naidu is non brahmins and there is no caste namely Naidu are not maintainable. This Court had upheld the finding of KIRTADS that in both the States of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, members of the petitioner's families or OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:5:- their near relatives are treated as Caste Naidus. Educationally and economically, Naidu community is an advanced community and Telugu is their mother tongue. The Kavara/Gavara community which is a recognized scheduled caste of Kerala were treated as untouchables and even now they are socially, economically and educationally backward. It is further contended that the Parliament has enacted the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Orders (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 by affecting amendments to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order 1950. In Part VIII for Entry 30, it has been decided to substitute "30 Kavara (other than Telugu speaking or Tamil speaking Balija Kavarai, Gavara, Gavarai, Gavarai Naidu, Balija Naidu, Gajalu Baija or Valai chetty). It is therefore contended that the nomenclature of numerous castes existing in Kerala is very complex, its synonyms, regional variations, similarity of names etc., have often been misused and misinterpreted by certain ineligible communities in Kerala, particularly the early immigrants from other States whose mother tongue is either Tamil or Telugu to style themselves as Scheduled Castes. It is therefore submitted that as directed by the Court, Ext.P1 representation was referred to the Scrutiny OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:6:- Committee. The Scrutiny Committee has offered personal hearing to the petitioner on 24/2/2001 on which date the counsel for petitioner appeared and presented his case. He also produced 36 documents in support of the petitioner's claim. The counsel requested for further time to produce more documents. Accordingly, Committee heard the petitioner and his counsel on 7/4/2001. The petitioner requested for further opportunity to produce witnesses before the 2nd respondent. The Committee met on 21/4/2001. Two witnesses were produced and their statements were recorded. Petitioner also filed a petition seeking more time to adduce further evidence. It is stated that on the request of the petitioner, personal hearing was scheduled on 16/6/2001 which was postponed to 7/7/2001 on which date 4 witnesses appeared before the Committee. On 25/8/2001, counsel for petitioner produced affidavits of persons sought to be examined before the Committee. He also produced 15 documents. The 2nd respondent Committee finalised hearing on 25/8/2001. The contention that there was no quorum for the 2nd respondent Scrutiny Committee and hence the petitioner was informed that the next date of hearing will be later informed is OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:7:- denied. It is stated that the 2nd respondent had heard the petitioner and his counsel on 24/2/2001, 7/4/2001 and 21/4/2001. Further opportunities were given to submit evidence of witnesses on 7/7/2001 and 25/8/2001. It is therefore submitted that there is no violation of principles of natural justice and every adequate opportunity of being heard and to present evidence was offered. It is also submitted that the full quorum of the 2nd respondent Committee took up the issue of petitioner on 18/5/2002 for finalising a decision and the Committee examined every aspect of the case in detail. The Committee considered all the objections and points raised by the petitioner as well as Ext.P129 enquiry report. After detailed discussion, the Committee decided to reject the SC (Gavara) claim of the petitioner and issued Ext.P3 proceedings. It is stated that it is in pursuance of Ext.P3 that Ext.P4 Government Order had been issued. It is further contended that petitioner has not challenged any of the genealogical details present in Ext.P129 report. It is with the support of certain bogus caste certificates obtained from the State of Tamil Nadu and Kerala and some affidavits given by witnesses who are all bogus SC (Gavara) claimants, petitioner is OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:8:- trying to establish his case. On enquiry it was revealed that the petitioner and his maternal and paternal ancestors belong to Balija Gavarai community, popularly known as Naidu who are caste Hindus. They have no genealogical relationship with the SC (Gavara) community, which is a depressed class.
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
7. The main contention urged by the petitioner is that the order has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. Further it is contended that the documents produced by the petitioner clearly prove the fact that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste community (Gavara).
8. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader while supporting the impugned orders contended that caste status has already been determined by the report of KIRTADS produced as Ext.P129 which clearly indicates the genealogical status of the petitioner. The petitioner is a person who is educationally, economically and socially maintaining high standard of life which is evident from the particulars and documents relied upon by KIRTADS. False documents and certificates by which certain OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:9:- persons have obtained benefit of Scheduled Caste status and benefits will not confer on them any right especially when the statutory authorities formed under the Act has given clear findings based on materials placed on record. It is therefore not within the jurisdiction of this Court to have a rowing enquiry into the factual details involved in the matter. Hence, the learned Government Pleader seeks for dismissal of the original petition.
9. First of all, I shall consider the question as to whether there is violation of principles of natural justice. There is no dispute about the fact that the petitioner has produced documents before the Scrutiny Committee. In the counter affidavit filed by the Government, it is clearly indicated that sufficient opportunity had already been given to the petitioner to adduce evidence. The undisputed fact would show that opportunity was given to the petitioners upto 25/8/2001 for producing documents and affidavit. In the meantime, petitioner had produced several documents and also examined 6 witnesses. Petitioner was also asked to produce affidavits of the persons sought to be examined before the Committee which he has already done. Therefore, it cannot be stated that he was not given OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:10:- any opportunity to adduce evidence. The only dispute is regarding the date of hearing. Ext.P2 is notice dated 13/8/2001 by which petitioner was asked to appear for giving evidence. Admittedly, he had appeared on the said date. As per Ext.P3 and as per the counter affidavit filed, Scrutiny committee finalised the hearing on 25/8/2001. The petitioner has a contention that there was no quorum for the meeting on 25/8/2001 and therefore petitioner was informed that next date of hearing will be notified. According to him, he did not receive any further notice and Ext.P3 order came to be passed. In fact the matter was considered by the Scrutiny Committee based on directions issued by the Government pursuant to orders issued by this Court in OP No.31905/2000. The materials placed on record would show that the petitioner was given sufficient opportunity to adduce evidence and he had in fact produced various materials and also examined a few witnesses. When it is stated in the impugned order Ext.P3 that the hearing was finalised on 25/8/2001, I do not think that a different view is possible to be taken in the circumstances. Further, even in the counter affidavit, it is clearly indicated that the hearing was finalised on the said date. No OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:11:- reply has been filed to the counter affidavit. Therefore, it has to be assumed that the order had been passed after taking note of all the materials placed on record. Therefore, I am of the view that the order had been passed after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to adduce evidence and the impugned order cannot be rejected on the ground that there is violation of principles of natural justice.
10. Yet another contention urged by the petitioner is that the finding of the KIRTADS as well as the Scrutiny Committee are absolutely baseless in so far as they proceeded on the basis that petitioner belongs to a community Gavara Naidu. According to the petitioner, Naidu is not a community at all and therefore, the basis of the finding is erroneous. Before proceeding further, it would be useful to refer to the KIRTADS report which is produced as Ext.P129. KIRTADS had also issued notice to the petitioner and he had also submitted the genealogical proforma along with a statement. He also produced 6 documents which were considered by the KIRTADS. After a detailed consideration of the genealogical status, while concluding, it is observed that "Thus the genealogical and documentary evidences from 5 to 68 OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:12:- revealed that all the consanguineal and affinal relatives of the candidate's father belong to Balija Gavarai community popularly known as Naidu". In regard to the candidate's mother also, after considering the matter in detail, it was held that "she was born and brought up in Tamil Nadu State and belongs to Balija Gavarai community of Tamil Nadu State". Reference is made to the work on Tribes and Caste of Cochin which was first published in 1912 by Professor L.K. Ananthakrishna Iyer, wherein he has given an ethnographic account on the scheduled caste Gavara/Kavara community.
"They make wickerwork of all kinds. The men bring the bamboo and make everything ready for their women to make a wickerwork. They eat the food of Brahmin and the high caste Nayars, but do not eat at the hands of other caste men. These people pollute by touch by Kakkalans but are polluted by the touch of Panans, Pulayans, Cherumans and other law caste men (at a distance). They are their own barbers and washerman. They are clothed very scantly and the males very seldom shave their heads."
11. The report further observes that the ethnographic coverage does not say that Naidu is a title of Scheduled Caste OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:13:- Kavara or Gavara community. If such a title really existed, definitely the author L.K. Ananthakrishna Iyer would have taken note of the same. Hence, it was found that the title of Naidu does not exist among the Scheduled Caste Kavara/Gavara community. Further reference is also made to the study on the community status of Balija Gavarai and Gajalu Balija. It is stated that Balija Gavarai are generally known under the caste Naidu which is evident from the book on Castes and Tribes of Southern India Volume 1 (1909) by Edgar Thurston. The report also takes note of the Cochin Education Code of 1921 which has classified 52 communities under the list of backward classes and 11 communities under depressed classes. Naidu community has been classified under the list of backward classes whereas Kavara community has been classified under depressed classes. It is further observed that the nomenclature of the numerous castes existing in Kerala is very complex. Its synonyms, regional variations, similarity of names etc., have often been misused and misinterpreted by certain ineligible communities in Kerala, particularly the early immigrants from other States whose mother tongue is either Tamil or Telugu to style themselves as SC/ST. OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:14:- Certain bogus certificates have not been detected and investigated in time by the concerned agencies. They have also managed to get bogus certificates to the effect that they belong to SC/ST categories and therefore, it is stated that such infiltration has happened taking away the fruits of reservation policy in order to obtain admission to professional colleges and to get appointment in government jobs. The report also evaluated the certificates submitted by the petitioner and while concluding it is recorded as under:-
"The genealogical study has revealed that V.Kumara Swamy and his son Varunkumar, the candidate herein were born in a prominent family in Alappuzha. In the genealogical proforma, page 4 of the Document-3, the candidate's father has stated that his father's mother's father viz.
Dr.Venkitaraman was a landlord. He has been acknowledged as the first allopathic doctor in Travancore. He was also one of the founders of the S.D.V.High School and S.D.V.College in Alappuzha. Similarly, the candidate's father's father's mother's brother Dr.Sundararaj Naidu was the director of Public Instruction and Pro-Vice Chancellor of Kerala University. The candidate is also related to S.S.Naidu, who was the Director of Panchayats, Govt. of Kerala and Subbaiyya Naidu, Director of Education, Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:15:- Islands. Thus the present study has revealed that the candidate's relatives have been well placed even prior to independence. All the above mentioned luminaries have never been identified as members of any Depressed Classes. Admittedly, they have been treated as Caste Hindus. It is significant to point out here that when the ancestors of the candidate had been enjoying a very high social status, Sri.Ayyan Kali, the great leader of Depressed Classes, had been fighting against social inequalities like freedom to walk on road, freedom to join school, freedom to wear upper clothes, freedom to take water from common wells, ponds etc. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in C.M.Arumugam Vs Rajagopal AIR 156 SC 939 has observed that the framers of the Constitution thought, they provided that the President may specify the caste and these would obviously be the lower castes which had suffered centuries of oppression and exploitation which shall be deemed to be Scheduled Castes. It is painful to note that by the turn of this Century, a Caste Hindu who has never suffered any type of social disabilities and who had an advantageous start in life, is trying to snatch away a precious seat in a professional college, which rightfully belongs to a member of the oppressed caste (now Scheduled Caste) through fraudulent means.
The genealogical and documentary evidences from 5 to 68 have revealed that all the consanguineal OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:16:- and affinal relatives of V.Kumaraswamy and his son Varunkumar belong to the Gavarai Naidu community popularly known as Naidu, which admittedly is not a recognised Scheduled Caste community of Kerala. Document 68 shows that the candidate's father Kumaraswamy V. is Naidu by caste. Documents 66 and 67 reveal that the candidate's father's brother and sister belongs to the Naidu community. Document 65 reveals that the candidate's father's father belongs to the Naidu community. Similarly, Documents 62 to 64 set of evidences reveal that his (candidate's) father's father's siblings and their children belong to the Naidu community. Documents 56 to 59 set of evidence show that the candidate's father's father's mother's siblings belong to the Naidu community. Similarly Documents 48 to 55 set of documents show that the candidate's father's father's mother's father's siblings and their children are Naidu by caste. As many as 36 documentary evidences presented here i.e., documents 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 33, 34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 46, 48, 50, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 and 65) relate to the Pre-Constitutional period which have great probative value in the context of this case. Had they belonged to Scheduled Caste Gavara community, there would have such declarations in all their records down the years. The candidate and his father have no genealogical connections with the Scheduled Caste Gavara community. Though the candidate's father OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:17:- has fraudulently managed to change his caste name from Naidu to Gavara in his school records, his brother and sister continue to be as belonging to Naidu in their school records. Documents 69, 71 and 72 show that Naidu is used as a caste name. In document-4 the candidate's father V.Kumaraswamy has admitted that his community is also known as Gavara Naidu. Document 75 is a kinship table showing the candidate's web of relationship with the persons mentioned in the documentary evidences. This document-75 applies in toto to the candidate's father V.Kumaraswamy. Therefore, V.Kumaraswamy and his son Varunkumar cannot belong to community that is different from their primary kingroups. Thus, the candidate Varunkumar and his father belong to the Gavarai Naidu community, popularly known as Naidu.
Therefore the community certificate produced by the candidate to the effect that he belongs to the Scheduled caste Gavara community is false." It could therefore be seen that the impugned order Ext.P129 had been passed after a detailed enquiry into the caste status and all the aspects of the matter had been clearly dealt with.
12. Now coming to Ext.P3, which is the proceedings of the Scrutiny Committee, they have accepted the report of the KIRTADS. In para 3, the contention of the petitioner had been given in detail and in para 4, it is clearly indicated that Scrutiny OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:18:- Committee had evaluated all the documents submitted by the claimant and it was found that all the documents produced by the claimant after Presidential Order of 1950 should not be relied upon because of the possibility of being manipulated. It is further held that the report of KIRTADS contains as many as 36 pre- constitutional documentary evidences which have greater probative value in the context of the claimant's case. The claimant himself has admitted that his community is known as Gavarai Naidu. It is further observed that "The Committee examined the affidavits filed by the witnesses produced by him before the Committee. In the statements filed by Narasimhan and Kalyani, they have also admitted that Gavara community to which they claim to belong is also using Naidu. The Committee noticed that the affidavits contain stereotyped statements. Through these statements, they attempt to say that Naidu is not a caste name. But the voluminous documents 5 to 75 and especially 36 pre-constitutional documents have conclusively proved that all the consanguineal and affinal relatives of the claimant have used Naidu as a caste name." Further reference was made to documents that are relied upon in the KIRTADS report and OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:19:- observed that the petitioner and his son were born in a prominent family in Alappuzha. In the proforma itself, the petitioner has mentioned that his father's mother's father Dr.Venkitaraman was a land lord. He was the first Allopathic Doctor in Travancore. He was also one of the founders of SDV High School and SDV College in Alappuzha. Petitioner's father's father Dr.Kumaraswamy acted as a Durbar Physician. Petitioner's father's mother's brother Dr.Sundararaj Naidu was the Director of Public Instruction and Pro-Vice Chancellor of Kerala University. Therefore, it is evident that petitioner's family comes from a very high background in the society socially, economically and educationally. It is also found that some of his relatives still continues to be Naidu and never claimed scheduled caste status.
13. Taking into account the aforesaid factual findings which has been approved by the Scrutiny Committee I do not think that this Court will be justified in interfering with the said factual findings on a reappreciation of the entire matter. Sufficient materials had been relied upon by the KIRTADS as well as by the Scrutiny Committee to arrive at their own findings, which cannot be disturbed.
OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:20:-
14. In Principal R.E.C. v. Suresh Babu [2002 (1) KLT SN 32], a Division Bench of this Court had occasion to consider a claim made by person belonging to Gavara community. It was held that both Kavara and Gavara are shown distinctly in the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Amendment) Order 1976 as two castes entitled to claim all the benefits of Scheduled Castes. It was observed that if there is reliable material on record to show that the petitioners belong either to Kavara and Gavara community, they are entitled to claim the benefits of Scheduled Castes. Division Bench further proceeded to hold that "But the report of KIRTADS would show that the petitioners do not belong to Scheduled Caste and they belong to Naidu community. The report was filed after conducting anthropological and genealogical study." Further it is held that "In our view, merely because the report of KIRTADS proceeds on the assumption that Kavara and Gavara are one and the same community, the report cannot be thrown out. On going through the report of KIRTADS, we find that the KIRTADS prepared the report after considering all material aspects. If the conclusions reached by KIRTADS are possible on the basis of the materials on record, this Court cannot OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:21:- interfere with the findings in exercise of its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution". It is further held that "As already stated, the report of the KIRTADS would show that the petitioners do not belong to the Scheduled Castes and they belong to Naidu community. In view of the report of the KIRTADS, no reliance could be placed on the certificates produced by the petitioners to show that they belong either to Kavara or Gavara community." It is therefore rather clear that the contention presently urged by stating that there is no community by name Naidu and therefore, the whole basis of enquiry by KIRTADS as well as the Scrutiny Committee is wrong cannot be sustained. In identical situations, the Division Bench of this Court had accepted the report of KIRTADS and there is no reason why a different view is to be taken in the matter.
15. In the said circumstances, I do not think that there is any material to take a different view from what has been taken by the competent authorities. OP No.26232/2002 is without any basis and the same is liable to be dismissed.
OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:22:-
16. OP No.10146/2003 has been filed by the son of the petitioner in OP No.26232/2002. This original petition was filed at a stage when KIRTADS had reported that he is not entitled for Scheduled Caste status. Pursuant to Ext.P1 order dated 11/6/2002 of the Scrutiny Committee (Ext.P3 in OP No.26232/2002), the 2nd respondent issued an order calling upon the petitioner to remit `52,056/- towards the balance tuition fee and special fees as per Ext.P4 dated 14/2/2003. In fact, he had claimed fee concession based on the community certificate stating that he belongs to Scheduled Caste category. The District Development Officer of Scheduled Castes had informed the University that the petitioner is not entitled for any fee concession. At the relevant time, petitioner was studying for the 6th semester and he was remitting fee at the concessional rate. If he was not entitled for fee remission, he has to pay a sum of `53,926/- after the 5th semester instead of `1,870/- which was paid as tuition fee, special fee, exam fee etc. Hence, he was directed to remit the balance amount of `52,056/- to the University.
17. His father had given a reply stating that the matter is OP Nos.26232/2002 & 10146/2003 -:23:- pending before this Court in OP No.26232/2002. A Counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent adopting the counter affidavit filed in OP No.26232/2002. The 2nd respondent has also filed a counter affidavit inter alia indicating that the petitioner is liable to pay the differential fee as he is not entitled for the benefits under the Scheduled Caste category. I have already found that the challenge to Exts.P3, P4 and P129 in OP No.26232/2002 is not sustainable. Under such circumstance, petitioner who had studied based on a concessional fee structure is liable to pay the differential amount as claimed in Ext.P4. In the result, petitioner is not entitled for any relief in OP No.10146/2003.
Accordingly, OP Nos.26232/2002 and 10146/2003 are dismissed.
Sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE Rp //TRUE COPY// PS TO JUDGE