IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 30TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1171 of 2008(M) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ----------------- 1. C.KRISHNAKUMAR, COUNCILLOR, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, RESIDING AT LAKSHMI VILASAM, VELLUNNI, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., ULLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. C.VIJAYAN, GALLERY PRESSMAN, GOVERNMENT CENTRAL PRESS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RESIDING AT LAKSHMI VILASAM, VELLUNNI, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., ULLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.) SMT.SUSHYA RAJAN SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SC/ST DEVELOPMENT (G) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATES REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN/THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SC/ST DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR, KIRTADS, DIRECTORATE OF KIRTADS, KOZHIKODE-17. 4. EDAVACODE ASOKAN, CHINNAVEEDU, T.C.7/2129-A, SREEKARYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-17. BY ADV. SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.RAVIKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.1171/2008 APPENDIX ETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE OBJECTION DT. 4.8.06 FILED BY THE IST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.20917/G2/05/SCSTDD DT. 26.5.07 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. ET.P3:- COPY OF THE LIST OF WITNESSES DT. 28.5.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE PETITION DT. 28.2.07 SUBMITTED BY THE IST PETITIONER REQUESTING FOR THE SUMMONING OF THE FILE FROM THE TALUK OFFICE. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE PETITION DT. 28.2.07 FILED BY THE IST PETITIONER FOR ISSUING SUMMONS TO THE WITNESSES. EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE REPORT NO.V.20/2005 DT. 22.4.06 SUBMITTED BY THE KIRTADS BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7:- COPY OF THE REPORT NO.20917/G2/05/SCSTDD DT. 24.10.07 ISSUED BY THE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE. EXT.P8:- COPY OF THE ELECTION PETITION DT. 7.10.05 OP (ELECTION) NO.1/2005 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MUNSIFF'S COURT , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P9:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 1.1.08 SUBMITTED BY THE IST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P10:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 1.1.08 SUBMITTED BY THE IST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R4(a):- COPY OF THE TAHSILDAR'S REPORT DT. 7.10.05. EXT.R4(b):- COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF ADMISSION REGISTER PERTAINING TO THE MOTHER OF PETITIONERS. EXT.R4(c):- COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF ADMISSION REGISTER DT. 15.3.06 OF DAUGHTER OF IST PETITIONER. EXGT.R4(d):- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 24.1.07 IN OP(ELE) NO.1 OF 2005 BY THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.R4(e):- COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN APPEAL (ELE) NO.5/2007. EXT.R4(f):- COPY OF THE IA. NO.89/08 DT. 10.1.2008. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.P.(C) No. 1171 of 2008-M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 19th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T The first petitioner is a Councilor of the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation from a ward reserved for the Scheduled Caste candidate. Based on a community certificate obtained and produced by him from the Village Officer, the first petitioner was allowed to contest the election as a Scheduled Caste candidate and having won, he is presently one of the members of the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation. The second petitioner is his brother, who, based on a similar certificate, obtained a job in the Government Press in Scheduled Caste quota, declaring himself as a member of the Scheduled Caste Community. On a complaint by the fourth respondent, who is a member of the Scheduled Caste Community and a rival candidate, who contested the election against the first petitioner, the Vigilance Cell of the KIRTADS conducted enquiry and based on Ext.P6 report of the Vigilance officer of the KIRTADS, the Scrutiny Committee examined the matter, took evidence and found that both the petitioners belong to the Veluthedathu Nair Community, which is given the status of “Other Backward W.P.(C) No. 1171 of 2008-M -: 2 :- Community” and not Scheduled Caste. It is against the report of Vigilance Officer KIRTADS and the decision of the scrutiny committee, petitioners have filed this writ petition. 2. I heard senior counsel Sri.N.Nandakumara Menon for the petitioners, the counsel appearing for the fourth respondent and the learned Special Government Pleader, Sri Ravikumar. 3. The main grievance of the petitioners is that Exts.P6 and P7 proceedings are vitiated on account of violation of natural justice in as much as they were not allowed to adduce evidence. However, on going through Exts.P6 and P7, I find that the Vigilance Officer of KIRTADS, based on details such as the names and addresses of the parents, grandparents and siblings of the petitioners submitted by them in the prescribed format, conducted a detailed enquiry and in the detailed enquiry carried out by him, he after identifying the relatives named by the petitioners and after taking evidence from such persons, their neighbours and residents of the area where the father, mother, grandfather, grandmother, siblings etc. of the petitioners and their wives lived and worked found that petitioners W.P.(C) No. 1171 of 2008-M -: 3 :- are members of the Veluthedathu Nair Community and many close relatives of the petitioners were till recently carrying on the traditional job of dhobies, i.e., washing clothes. Veluthedathu Nair is a community traditionally engaged in washing clothes of the upper caste Hindus. It is to be noted that in the original petition and the affidavit filed by the petitioners, the petitioners have not denied the identification of persons named in Ext.P6 namely their father, mother, grandfather, grandmother and other relatives of the petitioners and their in-laws from whom and about whom evidence was taken. It is clear from the report that, the Vigilance Officer of the KIRTADS has identified each and every relation of the petitioners in three generations and traced their profession by direct enquiry. Strangely, there is no inter-caste or inter-religious marriage by any member of the family in three generations and therefore there can be no controversy about the caste of any family members. The petitioners grandparents, both on the mother's side and father's side, were found to be the members of Veluthedathu Nair Community, which belongs to the Other Backward Community and not “Mannan” as claimed by petitioners. Therefore, the father and mother of both the petitioners were proved to be members of W.P.(C) No. 1171 of 2008-M -: 4 :- the Veluthedathu Nair Community. So, necessarily, the petitioners by birth have to be the members of the same community, even though younger generations probably have given up the traditional job of washing clothes. There is no need to consider petitioners' grievance of violation of natural justice in this case because the petitioners have not denied their close relationship with the persons referred to in the report which clearly proves that they are not members of Scheduled Caste Community “Mannan” as claimed by them but are members of the OBC “Veluthedathu Nair”. I do not think any purpose will be served by allowing the petitioners to adduce evidence because they cannot prove anything contrary to what is already proved based on the data pertaining to close relatives furnished by the petitioners in the prescribed format. The petitioners, obviously, managed bogus certificates declaring themselves as members of the Scheduled Caste Community and got what they are not entitled and consequently denied the benefit to the eligible persons. Their present attempt is to dodge the implementation of the report and order until at least first petitioner's tenure is over. I am of the view that courts by delaying proceedings should not encourage malpractices of this nature W.P.(C) No. 1171 of 2008-M -: 5 :- depriving benefits to the deprived and the out caste. There is no justification for this Court to interfere with the implementation of the detailed report of the KIRTADS and the Scrutiny Committee wherein the findings are well founded. The original petition is therefore devoid of any merit and it is, accordingly, dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge ms