IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2010 / 11TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 23910 of 2004(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ REJENDRAN R., NEDIYAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, VELLITHADAN, VELLAYANI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU.S.A RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 23910 OF 2004 (U) ===================== Dated this the 1st day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The controversy in this writ petition arose out of Ext.P3 application made by the petitioner for issuance of a certificate to the effect that he is a Hindu Nadar. Orders were not passed and therefore, the writ petition was filed. 2. Pursuant to the interim direction issued by this Court, Ext.P4 order was passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvananthapuram rejecting the request of the petitioner mainly on the ground that the petitioner is not a Hindu Nadar, and that he belongs to CSI Church. It would appear that this conclusion of the RDO was based on a report made by the Village Officer, Kalliyur and reports of the Revenue Inspector (Certificates). However, it would appear that these enquiries were not held with notice to the petitioner, and therefore, I feel that in conducting the enquiry as aforesaid and obtaining reports which were relied on against the petitioner, natural justice was denied to the petitioner. Therefore, Ext.P4 order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer cannot be sustained and is quashed. WPC No. 23910/04 :2 : 3. Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvananthapuram, who shall conduct an enquiry either by himself or through the Tahsildar concerned. It is directed that the enquiry shall be with notice to the petitioner and with opportunity to adduce evidence in support of his claim that he belongs to Hindu Nadar. On the basis of the enquiry, fresh orders in the matter shall be passed. Enquiry shall be concluded and orders thereon shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months. 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvananthapuram for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp