IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2010 / 30TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 31071 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRADEESH K.P., S/O.PRASAD KRISHNAVILASAMTHOPPU HOUSE KUMARAKOM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOTTAYAM DISTRICT ,KOTTAYAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTTAYAM TALUK,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER KUMARAKOM VILLAGE,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. SANTHOSHKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.31071 OF 2010(H) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's father belongs to Paravan community and his mother belongs to Ullada community, a scheduled caste. Petitioner claims that they are following the customs of Ullada's and therefore, should be issued a certificate to the effect that he belongs to a scheduled caste. Petitioner also relies on Ext.P3, the SSLC book, Ext.P4 community certificate of his mother and Ext.P5 Patta issued in mother's favour which documents, according to the petitioner, substantiates his contention. 2. It is stated that when an application was made, although an enquiry conducted revealed that the petitioner is still following the custom of the Ullada community, Ext.P1 certificate was issued by the 2nd respondent to the effect that the petitioner belongs to Paravan caste. It is aggrieved by Ext.P1 that this writ petition sf filed. 3. The stand taken by the Government Pleader is that in the enquiry conducted by the 2nd respondent, although, it is revealed that the petitioner's father and mother live together there is WPC.No. 31071/2010 :2 : nothing to conclude that the custom followed by the petitioner and his family are that of Ullada caste. It is stated that therefore Ext.P1 certificate was issued. 4. In my view, if as stated by the petitioner, the customs followed by them are that of a Ullada community, the petitioner might be entitled to the certificate particularly in view of the provisions contained in Ext.P2 Government Order. However this is a question of fact and therefore this court will not be in a position to take a decision in the mater. 5. In that view of the matter, I feel that the right course open to the petitioner is to file an appeal against Ext.P1, which has to be filed before the Revenue Divisional Officer. If such an appeal is filed, it will be possible for the Revenue Divisional Officer to conduct enquiry into the factual issues, either by himself or by deputing an authorized competent subordinate officer. Therefore, I relegate the petitioner to seek appeal remedies against Ext.P1 and direct that if an appeal against Ext.P1 is filed within 2 weeks from today, it will be entertained and disposed of with notice to the parties within 8 weeks. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No. 31071/2010 :3 :