IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2008 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1930 MFA.No. 210 of 2006() ----------------------------- AGAINST PROCEEDINGS OF THE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE BEARING NO.889/G2/02/SCSTDD DATED 28/08/2006 ......................... APPELLANT: ------------------ G. LEELA (JOINT DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT-RETIRED), 14/320, SALEM, SANTHUMMOLA, MALAYINKEEZH P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-71. BY ADV. SRI.A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PANICKER SMT.R.SEEMA RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SCHEDULED CASTES & SCHEDULED TRIBES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATES REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SCHEDULED CASTES & SCHEDULES TRIBES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KIRTADS, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF KIRTADS, KOZHIKODE-17. 4. THE VIGILANCE CELL OF KIRTADS, REP. BY THE VIGILANCE OFFICER, DIRECTORATE OF KIRTADS, KOZHIKODE-17. MFA.No. 210 of 2006 5. THE DIRECTOR, SCHEDULED CASTE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. THE DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT, DIRECTORATE OF EMPLOYMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR FOR R1 TO R6 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/11/2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MFA.No. 210 of 2006 ORDER ON I.A. NOS.2231/2006 AND 2232/2006 IN MFA NO.210/2006 DISMISSED 21/11/2008. SD/- J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE SD/- THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rs/ J.B. Koshy & Thomas P.Joseph, JJ. -------------------------------------- M.F.A. No.210 of 2006 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of November, 2008 Judgment Koshy,J. Action was taken against the appellant stating that she obtained employment reserved for scheduled castes/scheduled tribes on the representation that she belongs to Cheramar Hindu Pulaya community. In the S.S.L.C. book issued in 1963 her caste was shown as Lutheran X'ian Cheramar,in other words, Cheramar Christian. It is the case of the petitioner that she went to Arya Samajam and as per the rites, she was converted as Cheramar Hindu scheduled caste community. It is her further case that thereafter she married as per customary rites of Chermar Hindu community on the basis of a 'Karar' and not by Christian rites. She also stated that she did not make any false representation and the community certificate was issued on the basis of the certificate of Arya Samajam. She got employment on the basis of community certificate issued by the statutory authorities. But, on the basis of the complaint, scrutiny committee finally found that she cannot be treated as belonging to Hindu Cheramar community merely due to M.F.A.No.210/2006 2 re-conversion. Her parents and grand-parents were Cheramar Christians and therefore, there cannot be re-conversion to Cheramar Hindu community as originally she was a Cheramar Christian. There is no re-conversion but only conversion to Hindu community. Therefore, the decision of the Supreme Court in C.M.Arumugam v. Rajagopal((1976) 1 SCC 863) that they attained the old status on re- conversion will not apply in this case. Hence, we are of the view that no interference is required. It is submitted that appellant was accepted by the Cheramar community and that she has been following the rites of the Hindu community but whatever that may be, her parents were Christians and therefore, she cannot re-convert to the original community as she was born as a Christian. But, we note that there was no false representation by her. She obtained job on the basis of the community certificate. In these circumstances, we are of the view that she shall not be prosecuted though her siblings will not get job as belonging to scheduled caste Pulaya community. She got employment on the basis of community certificate issued by the statutory authorities and since there is no mis-representation by her and she retired from service in the year 2002, no further action will be taken against her. None of the benefits she received shall be recovered from her and she may be M.F.A.No.210/2006 3 given pensionary benefits because she worked during the period without any complaint. We make it clear that her family members cannot claim the benefit of scheduled caste community any further. The M.F.A. is disposed of with the above observations. J.B.Koshy Judge Thomas P. Joseph Judge vaa M.F.A.No.210/2006 4 J.B. KOSHY AND THOMAS P.JOSEPH,JJ. ------------------------------------- M.F.A.No.210/2006 ------------------------------------- Judgment Date:21st November,2008