IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2008 / 9TH MAGHA 1929 WA.No. 251 of 2008 -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.37288/2007 Dated 17/12/2007 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- DR.HAMLET, AGED 37, S/O.ALFRED SOMA VILASAM, VELLIMON, KUNDARA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PERINAD VILLAGE OFFICE, PERINAD. 4. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SPL. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.T. RAVIKUMAR. BY SC, KPSC ADV. SRI. ALEXANDER THOMAS. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L. DATTU, CJ. & K.M. JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WRIT APPEAL No. 251 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT K.M.JOSEPH, J, Petitioner is the appellant. The appellant approached this court with the writ petition seeking to quash Ext.P10 and seeking a direction to issue non- creamy layer certificate to him showing his caste status as Parava Christian entitled for reservation under OX category. He further sought a direction to extend the time for production of non-creamy layer certificate. 2. The brief case of the appellant is as follows: He claims that he belongs to Parava community following Christian religion, and the Parava community is recognised as Scheduled Caste. He applied for the post of Assistant Insurance Medical Officer as notified by the Kerala Public Service Commission. Public Service Commission insisted production of non- creamy layer certificate to avail the benefit of reservation. Petitioner applied for non-creamy layer certificate. That has been rejected by Ext.P10 by the second respondent holding that the local enquiry conducted brought out that the petitioner is following Christian religion under Latin Catholic denomination, and therefore he is member of Latin Catholic Community. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition essentially following the Division Bench decision of this court in Rajan v. State of Kerala (2007(1) K.L.T. 730). 3. We heard learned counsel for the appellant Sri. R.T.Pradeep. He contends that this is a case where Ext.P1 would show that the appellant was W.A. 251/2008. 2 admitted in the 1st standard on 12.5.1975 and therein his caste is shown as Parava Christian. Ext.P1 (a) is the admission register pertaining to the appellant as to his admission to 5th standard in the year 1979. These documents, according to him would suffice to show that the appellant is a Parava Christian and he should be issued with a non-creamy layer certificate on the said lines, he contends. 4. A Division Bench of this court considered virtually the very same question, which is now raised by the appellant in the decision in Rajan V. State of Kerala (2007(1) K.L.T. 730) and proceeded to hold as follows: “Under the above mentioned circumstance we are inclined to dismiss all the writ petitions rejecting their request describe them as members belonging to Christian Parava/Bharatha Community. We make it clear that if the petitioners still feel that they really belong to Scheduled Castes community, it is for them to produce the relevant materials before the authorities concerned and establish their claim. We make it clear that if the petitioners want the community certificate, stating that they belong to Parava/Bharatha Community, the burden is on them to establish the same. SSLC Book is not an authentic piece of evidence to determine the caste status of a community especially in the wake of the report of the Vigilance Officer, KIRTADS and the Tahsildar. “ 5. Learned counsel for the appellant confronted with the legal position declared by this court would contend that it is practically not possible for the appellant to produce any further evidence than those he has produced. We would think that there is no merit in the said contention. We are not shown any reason why we should not follow the Division Bench decision of this court. If we follow the Division Bench decision of this W.A. 251/2008. 3 court, the documents which have been produced by the appellant were not sufficient to issue a non-creamy layer certificate showing that he belongs to Parava Christian. In such circumstances, we find that there is no merit in this writ appeal, and it is dismissed. H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE sb.