IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 28TH BHADRA 1930 OP.No. 99 of 2000(J) -------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SUNIL KRISHNAN. C, CHAMMUKAKALAM, MANKARA P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI (SR.) SRI.M.R.ANISON RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SC/ST DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM – 695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, PALAKKAD-278001. 4. THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, H.Q. OFFICE, PARK TOWN, P.O. CHENNAI – 600003. 5. THE SENIOR DIVL. MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD DIVISION, PALAKKAD-678002. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.CHERIAN,SR.SC.,RAILWAYS FOR R4,5 SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER (SC/ST) SRI. RENI KUMAR. SRI.K.G.BHASKARAN FOR R4 & R5 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/09/2008, THE COURT, ON THE SAME DAY, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: O.P.NO. 99/2000. ---------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF 1ST PAGE OF S.S.L.C.BOOK. EXT.P2 CASTE CERTIFICATE DT. 8-8-1986. EXT.P3 DO. DT. 3-1-1985. EXT.P4 1ST PAGE OF S.S.L.C. BOOK OF PETITIONER'S FATHER. EXT.P5 CASTE CERTIFICATE DT. 21-3-1959. EXT.P6 JUDGMENT IN O.P. 4506/79 DT. 5-11-1980. EXT.P7 ORDER DT. 15-6-1988. EXT.P8 PROCEEDINGS DT. 5-3-1990. EXT.P9 ORDER IN O.A.NO. 1601/91 DT. 29-1-1993. EXT.P10 SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DT. 1-8-1995. EXT.P11 LETTER DT. 8-2-95. EXT.P12 JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO. 789/1996. EXT.P13 ORDER DT. 3-7-1990. EXT.P14 ORDER OF SUPREME COURT IN S.L.P (CIVIL) NO. 7780/95. EXT.P15 JUDGMENT IN O.A.NO. 680/90. EXT.P16 LIST OF DOCUMENTS. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------ EXT.R1(a) ORDER DT. 8-1-1999 IN S.L.P. (C) 7780/97. EXT. R4(A) JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO. 13956/95 DT. 29-2-1996. EXT.R4(B) LETTER DT. 13-2-1990. EXT.R4(C) LETTER DT. 10-7-1989. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= O.P. No. 99 of 2000 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 19th September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The issue involved in this original petition is as to whether the petitioner belongs to the scheduled caste community of Hindu Thandan or whether he is a Hindu Thiyya. The issue has a chequered history starting from 1988. The petitioner approached this Court and the Central Administrative Tribunal. Each time, there was a direction to reconsider the claim of the petitioner. Ultimately, pursuant to the directions, the Tahsildar concerned passed Ext. P8 order whereby the petitioner's claim for community status as a scheduled caste was rejected. The petitioner challenged the same by filing O.P. No. 13956/1995. By judgment reported in C. Sunil Krishnan v. State of Kerala and others, AIR 1997 Kerala 63, the original petition was dismissed. The petitioner challenged that judgment in W.A.No. 789/1996, which was also dismissed by Ext. P12 judgment. The petitioner took up the matter in appeal before the Supreme Court in S.L.P(Civil) No. 7780/1997 in which, by Ext. R1(a) judgment, the Supreme Court held thus: “The order dated 5-3-1990 passed by the Tahsildar, Palghat, rejecting the claim of the petitioner that he belongs to Schedule Caste under Exhibit P13 has become final. This order cannot be interfered with in an ancillary proceeding initiated by the petitioner. Notice was issued by the authorities in August, 1995 under Exhibit P16. In that view of the matter, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the High Court where the writ appeal stood dismissed. The SLP is dismissed.” The petitioner submits that Ext. P8 was confirmed by the Government by Ext. P13 behind the back of the petitioner and therefore the same is not binding on the petitioner. He therefore submits that the petitioner should be given an opportunity to prove his caste status before the scrutiny committee under The Kerala (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates O.P. No. 99/2000. -: 2 :- Act, 1996 (Act 11/1996). 2. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the State strongly disputes the claim of the petitioner. According to him, the Supreme Court having finally rejected the petitioner's claim for community status as a scheduled caste, the petitioner cannot now again re-agitate the issue by seeking a fresh opportunity to agitate his community status before the authorities under the said Act. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. It cannot be disputed that the Supreme Court has finally upheld the orders of the Tahsildar and the Government holding that the petitioner does not belong to the Thandan community and he belongs to the Hindu Thiyya community. I do not think that after having suffered Ext. P14 judgment, the petitioner can now seek to re-open the whole issue by seeking an opportunity to prove his claim for community status in accordance with the abovesaid Act. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the original petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/