This writ appeal challenged a Scrutiny Committee order denying the petitioner Scheduled Caste status due to his father being SC and mother being Ezhava. The High Court held that it cannot reassess evidence in Article 226 proceedings and dismissed the appeal against the lower court's judgment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/5TH MAGHA, 1937
WA.No. 2655 of 2015
JUDGMENT DATED 04-08-2015 IN WP(C) 23997/2011
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:
-----------------------------------------
C.V. ANIL KUMAR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, COCHIN 22, RESIDING AT LEJI MANIL, KULAYATTIKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SMT.K.NANDINI
SRI.ANANDAN PILLAI
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
-------------------------------------------------
1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SC-ST DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. THE CHAIRMAN,
SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION
3. SRI.V.R PADMANABHAN,
4. THE REGISTRAR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI - 682 022.
5. THE VIGILANCE OFFICE, DIRECTOR OF KIRTADS, KOZHIKODE - 673 517.
R4 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI, SC, COCHIN UNIVERSITY R1-R3 & R5 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.I.DAVIS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
msv/
ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J. &
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
================
W.A. No. 2655 of 2015
==============
Dated this, the 25th day of January, 2016
J U D G M E N T
Ashok Bhushan, C.J.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. This writ appeal has been filed against judgment dated 4/8/2015 in WP(C) No.23997/11. Petitioner, who is the appellant before us, has filed the writ petition praying for the following reliefs;
“I. To call for the records leading to the issuance of Ext.P8 order dated 23/8/2011 of the Scrutiny Committee and issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ to quash Ext.P8 order.
II. To declare that the Caste status of the petitioner is that of Scheduled Caste Paravan.
III. To direct the 4th respondent to enter the petitioner's caste as Scheduled Caste Paravan in the petitioner's Service Book.”
The writ petition has been heard and dismissed by the learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment. The appellant aggrieved by the said judgment has come up in the appeal.
W.A. No.2655/15
-:2:-
order, which was issued by the Scrutiny Committee, was passed without giving proper opportunity to the petitioner and various submissions made by the petitioner have not been considered. He submits that Ext.P7 argument note was given raising various issues which have not been met in by the Committee. He submits that petitioner's father belongs to Scheduled Caste (SC) and hence petitioner ought to have been treated as a Scheduled Caste category .
W.A. No.2655/15
-:3:-
terms of the Government Order dated 20th November, 2008. All circumstances and facts which were brought on record before the Scrutiny Committee and the report submitted have been considered and a finding has been recorded by the Scrutiny Committee that petitioner is to be held belonging to the Ezhava Community. In the SSLC book, petitioner and his sister's caste status is shown as Ezhava Community. The materials relied on by the Scrutiny Committee are sufficient to come to the conclusion that the petitioner cannot be given the benefit of SC status. Learned Single Judge has also considered the submissions and all the materials on record and has dismissed the writ petition.
W.A. No.2655/15
-:4:-
The scope of interference under Article 226 being limited against an order passed by the statutory authority, we do not find any error in the judgment of the learned Single Judge refusing to interfere with Ext.P8. There is no merit in the appeal and, hence, the same is dismissed.
Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN, CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE
Rp25/1/2016
//True Copy//
PS to Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can reassess evidence and findings of a Scrutiny Committee report in writ proceedings.
Whether the order of the Scrutiny Committee depriving Scheduled Caste status due to intercaste marriage is perverse or based on no material.
Whether the Single Judge correctly refused to interfere with the Scrutiny Committee's finding that the petitioner belongs to the Ezhava Community.
C.V. Anil Kumar
The Principal Secretary, SC-ST Development Department
The Chairman, Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Community Certificate
Sri.V.R Padmanabhan
The Registrar, Cochin University of Science and Technology
The Vigilance Office, Director of Kirtads
Ashok Bhushan
A.M. Shaffique
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
