IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2011 / 15TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18188 of 2011(W) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- MOHANAN S/O DASAN, PAINKARAVILAKATHU VEEDU, ARAYOOR P.O., AMARAVILA (VIA), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 001. 3. THE VIGILANCE OFFICER, VIGILENCE CELL, DIRECTORATE OF KIRTADS, KOZHIKODE-19. 4. THE THAHASILDAR, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, PIN -695 020. BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.SANTHOSHKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.18188/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO PROFESSIONAL DEGREE COURSES 2011, KERALA. P2 COPY OF THE S.S.L.C. CERTIFICATE. P3 COPY OF THE COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE DATED 2/6/2011. P4 COPY OF THE REPORT WITH NO.V.10/2011/REJ-SC22 DATED 27/4/2011 WITH THE DOCUMENTS ATTACHED TO REPORT. P5 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B3-261/11. P6 COPY OF THE S.S.L.C BOOK OF PETITIONER'S SISTERS & BROTHER. P7 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KERAL CHERAMAR SANGHAM CERTIFY THAT PETITIONER AND HIS FAMILY BELONGS TO 'HINDU CHERAMAR' COMMUNITY. P8 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY AYYAPPASEVA SANGHAM CERTIFY THAT PETITIONER AND HIS FAMILY BELONGS TO HINDUISM. P9 COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.242/07 DATED 30/1/07. P10 COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE GENERAL SECRETARY OF SCHEDULED CASTE-SCHEDULED TRIBE RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION DATED 31/3/2010. P11 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE TO THE SAID EFFECT ISSUED BY CHENKAL GRAMAM PANCHAYAT. P12 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 19/4/2001 TO THE EFFECT THAT PETITIONER BELONGS TO CHERAM HINDU COMMUNITY. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18188 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P5 order passed by the Commissioner, the 2nd respondent rejecting the application made by the petitioner's daughter for admission to professional Degree Courses 2011. Petitioner claims to be a Hindu Cheramar. Ext.P1 is an application made by his minor daughter, for admission to professional degree courses 2011. In that application she claimed the status of SC/ST available to a Hindu Cheramar and in support thereof, a caste certificate was also enclosed. 2. In terms of the Government Order, the claim made was referred to the 3rd respondent for enquiry and Ext.P4 is the report submitted by the 3rd respondent. In Ext.P4, 3rd respondent concluded W.P.(C) No. 18188 OF 2011 -:2:- that the application of the petitioner's daughter for admission against the quota reserved for Scheduled Tribes is liable to be rejected. Based on Ext.P4, the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P5, the operative portion of which reads as follows. “In exercise of the powers conferred as per section 6 of the Kerala Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1996 (Act 11 of 1996) the Screening Committee, therefore decided to accept the report of KIRTADS and to reject the SC claim of the candidate. The Honourable Lok Ayukta in its Order dt.25.5.2009 in Complaint No.413/2008 has made strong remarks on the impropriety of accepting the application in case where the community claim is rejected. In the light of the W.P.(C) No. 18188 OF 2011 -:3:- Order of Honourable Lok Ayukta, the Screening Committee decided to reject the application of Neethu V Mohan for admission to Professional Degree Course, 2011. The above decision of the Screening Committee is hereby intimated to the candidate.” 3. This is the order under challenge. A reading of Ext.P5 shows that the paternal grandparents of the petitioner belonged to Christian Cheramar community. It is also found that the school admission register of the petitioner, a copy of which is appended to Ext.P4 report indicates that his status was Christian Cheramar. The Suddhi certificate, which indicates that the petitioner converted to Hindu Cheramar, is dated 27.9.2006. The gazette notification of the change of community is dated 6.10.2006. On this basis it is found that the petitioner's W.P.(C) No. 18188 OF 2011 -:4:- father was born and was living as a Christian until he attained 39 years. It is also stated that the wife of the petitioner is a migrant from Tamil Nadu belonging to Ezhava Community. Taking note of all these, it is concluded in the report that the candidates' grand parents and parents have never suffered any disability being of Cheramar Community. On this basis, the conclusion in the report is as follows. “Here, in the present case, genealogical analysis and documentary evidences shows that the candidate and her sister have not suffered the socio-cultural backwardness of the Scheduled Caste Cheramar Community. The investigation also shows that the candidate's family is devoid of the socio-cultural background of a Scheduled Caste Cheramar Community. The children have been living in W.P.(C) No. 18188 OF 2011 -:5:- the milieu and circumstances of their mother's family, who belongs to the Hindu Ezhavar Community. Thus the claimant's claimed SC Cheramar status is against the facts as she has not been subjected to the same social disabilities and also following the same customs and traditions' of a Scheduled Caste.” Hence, in view of the above mentioned facts her claim as a member of Scheduled Caste Cheramar Community cannot be conceded. The enquiry reveals that she has more affinity towards her mother's side and has been brought up according to the customs and practices of Ezhava Community.” 4. In the light of the factual findings contained in Exts.P4 and P5 and the documents attached thereto, I do not find any perversity in the view taken by either the 3rd respondent or the W.P.(C) No. 18188 OF 2011 -:6:- 2nd respondent. In such a situation, the rejection of the Scheduled Tribe status claimed by the petitioner cannot be interfered with. Therefore this writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-