Disposed

State of Kerala v. Nithin Dev V.R.

Kerala HC25 Oct 2021WA/962/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two bench disposed of writ appeals challenging a judgment on caste certification principles. Relying on a prior High Court decision, the court held that since the student had completed his course and the certificate was issued, it was not inclined to delve into rival contentions.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal is disposed of as the student had completed the course and a certificate was issued.

State of Kerala Vs Nithin Dev V.R. — Caste Atrocities | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶6

MONDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1943

¶7

WA NO. 962 OF 2016

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 25993/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF

¶9

KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶10

APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN W.P.(C):

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA

¶12

REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, OF SCHEDULED CASTE/SCHEDULED TRIBE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶13

2 THE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATES SC/ST DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695001.

¶14

3 THE VIGILANCE CELL DIRECTORATE OF KIRTADS, KOZHIKODE 17.

¶15

4 ADDITIONAL APPELLANT NO.4 THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, 5TH FLOOR,HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS,SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE APPEAL IS TRANSPOSED AS ADDITIONAL APPELLANT NO.4 IN THE WRIT APPEAL VIDE ORDER DATED 12/7/16 IN I.A.904/16 IN WA 962/16.

¶16

BY SEPCIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.K.ROBINRAJ,

¶17

RESPONDENTS:

¶18

1 NITHIN DEV V.R. AGED 19 YEARS S/O.VIJAYAKUMAR T, RESIDING AT MASS RESIDENCE, NEAR PONMADAM JUME MASJID, PONMADAM, MALAPPURAM 676106

¶19

2 THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, 5TH FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001.

¶20

2ND RESPONDENT IN THE APPEAL IS TRANSPOSED BY ADV SRI.K.C.ELDHO FOR R1

¶21

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2021,

¶22

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.A. No. 962/2016

: 2 :

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 25^th day of October, 2021

¶27

S. MANIKUMAR, CJ.

¶28

Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 3/9/2015 in W.P.(C) No.25993 of 2015, by which a learned Single Judge, after considering

¶29

the pleadings and taking note of the decision in Lavya A. v. Director of Medical Education, Thiruvananthapuram & Ors. , reported in [2014 (1) KHC 290], at paragraph 10, ordered thus:

¶30

“10. This court in Lavya A. Vs. Director of Medical Education, Thiruvananthapuram [2014 (1) KHC 290] discussed the principles which relating to the caste status of an offspring of the intercaste marriage.

¶31

“The principles that emerge from the foregoing discussion are the following:

¶32

i) In the case of an offspring of an inter-caste marriage there is a strong presumption that the offspring takes the caste of the father, but, however, all the same a rebuttable presumption

¶33

ii) Act 11/1996 casts the burden of proof on the claimant and it is for the claimant to establish his/her claim of being included as a member of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe.

¶34

iii) This burden cast on the claimant has to be harmonized with the presumption, stated above, which has been

¶35

W.A. No. 962/2016

¶36

: 3 :

¶37

judicially recognized by binding decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Hence, if the father belongs to a forward community and the claim is based on the mother’s caste status, then the claimant has to establish that the claimant was brought up by the mother, within the fold of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled tribe to which the mother belongs and prove that the claimant suffered the deprivation,s indignities, humilities and handicaps like any other member of the mother’s community. If the claimant relies on the caste of his father to substantiate his claim of belonging to a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled tribe, then on establishing the cast of his father, the claimant discharges the burden cast on him ajn the presumption takes effect. This presumption, however, is rebuttable by the State or in the present case by the Expert Agency constituted under Art. 11/1996

¶38

iv) The Caste Certificate issued by the Competent Authority is not conclusive as per the provisions of Act 11/1996 and is subject to verification by the Screening Committee and the Scrutiny Committee.

¶39

v) The report of the Expert agency is conclusive proof, for or agains the Scheduled caste or Scheduled Tribe claim, unless the same is found contrary by the Scrutiny committee.

¶40

vi) Though not conclusive when the competent Authority under the Act has issued a Community Certificate after due process, then to unsettle the claim there should be sufficient cogent material evidence to disprove the claim.”

¶41

On this day when the matter came up for hearing, on instructions

¶42

W.A. No. 962/2016

¶43

: 4 :

¶44

Mr.K.C.Eldho, learned counsel for respondent No.1, submitted that the student has completed M.B.B.S course, passed out and certificate was also issued by the competent authority.

¶45

As the student has already completed the course, we are not inclined

¶46

to delve into the rival contentions made in the Writ Appeal.

¶47

Writ appeal is accordingly disposed of.

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

S. MANIKUMAR, CHIEF JUSTICE.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY,

JUDGE.

smv

State of Kerala v. Nithin Dev V.R.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Nithin Dev V.R.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.K. Baby Vs District Collector

Suhara V.A Pakkai Vs the Thahasildar

Mini Jairaj Vs the District Collector

K.Rajanarayana Rao Vs the Board of Trustees

Laju Vas Vs Punnapara South Grama Panchayat

Thrikkakara Municipality Vs Atc Telecommunication Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.