IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2009 / 23RD POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 442 of 2009(C) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- R.VISWANATHA PILLAI PALLATHUPARAMBU, KANAMVAYAL PO., RAJAGIRI, VIA., CHERUPUZHA, KANNUR DT. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SC/ST DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KERALA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH, TRAININGA ND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES OF SCHEDULE CASTES AND SCHEDULE TRIBES (KIRTADAS), KOZHIKODE-17, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR. 4. SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION OF SC/ST CLAIMS, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA 6. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. 7. TAHSILDAR, AMBALAPUZHA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DT. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 442 OF 2009 (C) ==================== Dated this the 13th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard both sides. 2. The dispute in this writ petition is regarding the caste status of the petitioner. Initially by Exts.P1 and P2, petitioner was held to be not belonging to the scheduled caste Kuravan community. Against Exts. P1 and P2, writ petition was filed and that was dismissed. Review petition was also dismissed and even the special leave petition filed before the Apex Court was also dismissed. Subsequently, on an application made to the Anthropological Survey of India, petitioner submits that Ext.P6 study report was given suggesting that the petitioner belongs to Kuravan community. Based on Ext.P6, petitioner submitted Ext.P7 application before the 7th respondent for a community certificate and he also simultaneously forwarded Ext.P6 to the 3rd respondent under cover of Ext.P8. Complaining that there has not been any action on Ext.P7, the writ petition is filed. 3. Learned Government Pleader on instruction submits that on receipt of Ext.P6 report along with Ext.P7 application made by the petitioner, the 7th respondent has forwarded the same to the 3rd respondent for their study and report. It is stated that a report of the WPC 442/09 :2 : KIRTADS is still awaited. Since the competent authority, the 7th respondent, is awaiting for the study report of the 3rd respondent, at this stage, this court will not be justified in passing any of the directions that are sought for in this writ petition. However, on the 3rd respondent submitting its report, necessarily, the 7th respondent will pass orders on Ext.P7 application in the light of the report. This the 7th respondent shall do, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 months of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp