PRABHUDEV MALLIKARJUNAIAH Vs. RAMACHANDRA VEERAPRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under S. 116-B of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short, the 'Act') arises from the judgment of the High Court of Karnataka made on October 27, 1994 in Election Petition No. 3 of 1991. The appellant had filed his nomination as a Schedule Caste candidate to the Bidar-1 (SC) Parliamentary Constituency for the 9th Lok Sabha on April 26, 1991. It was rejected by the Returning Officer by his proceedings dated April 27, 1991 finding that he is a Verrashiva Jangamma and that, therefore, he is not a Beda Jangamma, which is item 19 of the Presidential Notification in relation to the State of Karnataka. He filed the election petition in the High Court, which was dismissed by the aforesaid judgment. Thus this appeal.

(2.) Shri N. D. B. Raju, learned counsel for the appellant, contended that the appellant was Beda Jangamma. His father was the President of Beda Jangamma Association. He had the benefit of contesting the elections as a member of Beda Jangamma. The finding of the High Court that he is not Beda Jangamma is not correct. He contends that among the Lingayaths, there are various sub-castes. Though, as a fact, it was found that the appellant's sub-caste is Verrashiva, in fact, it is only a Beda Jangamma. His father used to adopt begging which the Beda Jangamma caste would do. Consequently, the appellant cannot be denied of the status as a Beda Jangamma. He also sought to place strong reliance on the judgment of the civil Court, Ex. P-14, in Misc. No. 75 of 1987, made on February 26, 1988, in which the appellant therein was held to be Beda Jangamma and that, therefore, the findings of the High Court are incorrect. Having considered the evidence, we find that there is no force in the contention.

(3.) It is seen that under Art. 341 of the Constitution, the Presidential Notification is conclusive subject to the amendment under clause (2) of Art. 341. In 1976, Schedule Castes, Schedule Tribes (Amendment) Act had been made. Admittedly, under item No. 19, in relation to the State of Karnataka, Beda Jangamma or Budaga Jangamma are declared as Schedule Castes. As a fact, the finding recorded by the High Court is that the appellant belongs to Veerashiva Lingayath Community and he is a Jangamma. The question, therefore, is:whether Veerashiva Lingayath would be considered to be a Schedule Caste (Beda Jangamma) within the notification issued by the President It is settled law that the Courts cannot give any declaration that the status with synonymous names of castes claimed by the party is conformable to the names specified in the Presidential Notification issued under Art. 341 of the Constitution.