IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2009 / 8TH MAGHA 1930 MFA.No. 557 of 2002(Q) ---------------------- (AGAINST THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION OF SC/ST CLAIMS NO.16226/G2/97/SCSTDD DT.21.1.2002) APPELLANT(S): -------------- 1. C.P.MANODHARI,CHENAKKAPARAMBIL, A.R.NAGAR,CHENDAPPURAYA,TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. CHANDRAMATHY C.P., CHENAKKAPARAMBIL, A.R.NAGAR,TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. PREMASUDHA C.P., CHENAKKAPARAMBIL, A.R.NAGAR,TIRUR TALUK,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. SUBHASHAN P., PUTHENVEETTIL, CHERUVARGOOR,VAZHAKKAD P.O. BY ADV. SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI (SR.) SRI.M.R.ANISON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM. 2. SCRUTINY FOR VERIFICATION OF SC/ST CLIAMS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 3. THE KERALA INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (KIRTADS), DIRECTORATE OF KIRTADS, KOZHIKODE - 17, REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR. 4. THE VIGILANCE CELL, DIRECTORATE OF KIRTADS, KOZHIKODE -17 REP.BY ITS VIGILANCE OFFICER. MFA 557/2002 5. THE TAHSILDAR,TIRUR,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE. BY SPL.GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MFA 557/2002 ORDER ON CMP NO.3284/2002 IN MFA 557/2002 DISMISSED. 28.01.2009. SD/- K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. SD/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- M.F.A. NO.557 OF 2002-B ----------------------------------------- Dated 28th January, 2009. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. Appellants 1 to 3 are sisters. The 4th appellant is their mother's father's sister's son. This appeal is filed by them, challenging the order of the Scrutiny Committee No.16226/G2/97/SCSTDD dated 21.1.2002. By the said order, the Scrutiny Committee held that they do not belong to Arunthathiyar community, which is a scheduled caste. All the appellants were found to belong to Kavuthiyan community. The appellants attack the said order of the Scrutiny Committee on various grounds. One of the main grounds urged is that on the date of personal hearing, which was scheduled to be held on 6.11.2001, the 1st appellant had submitted a petition dated 5.11.2001, praying for adjournment of the matter. In her application, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-A1 along with I.A.No.83/2009, she stated that she has underwent a major operation recently and she cannot travel to appear before the Scrutiny Committee. She also submitted that she MFA 557/2002 2 is trying to collect some more documents to prove that she belongs to Arunthathiyar caste. The said motion for adjournment is admittedly received by the Scrutiny Committee, as is evident from the averments in para 6 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents in this M.F.A. The Scrutiny Committee considered the said application and took the view that since the 1st appellant's brother is present, it is unnecessary to adjourn the matter. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the 1st appellant wanted to rely on the documents listed in Annexure-A2, produced along with I.A.No.83/2009. He also handed over copies of the documents mentioned therein. We notice that in some of the documents, which date back to periods before 1974, the year in which the dispute regarding the caste status of the appellants arose, the caste name of the persons concerned, who are the relatives of the appellants, is shown as belonging to Arunthathiyar community. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that if the 1st appellant was given a chance, she could have produced those documents and the decision of the Scrutiny Committee would have been different. 3. We heard the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents. We feel that the 1st appellant was denied the chance to present MFA 557/2002 3 her case properly. Since this is an appeal, we could have examined the documents produced by her. But, we feel that it is only appropriate that the Scrutiny Committee first examines them and decides whether those documents will have any impact on the caste claim of the appellants. In view of the above position, we set aside the order of the Scrutiny Committee impugned in this appeal and remit the matter to the Scrutiny Committee for fresh disposal in accordance with law. The Committee shall give an opportunity to the 1st appellant to produce additional documents, if any, and hear and dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six months from today. The appellants shall produce a copy of this judgment before the Scrutiny Committee within one month from today. The M.F.A is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE. Nm/