A K MINI ALIAS MINIPODIYAN Vs. JWALA SAJIKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short, but, interesting question arise in common for consideration in these revisions, both filed by the returned candidates whose election as members to the Panchayat was impeached. Both of them were elected from reserved constituencies earmarked for Scheduled Caste. Election of the revision petitioner in C.R.P. No. 834 of 2007 was impeached on the ground she belonged to the Scheduled Tribe and that of the revision petitioner in C.R.P. No. 252 of 2008 contending that he is a converted Christian, and thus, disqualified. Both of them are incompetent and not qualified to contest from the reserved constituencies for Scheduled Caste was the challenge in the respective Election Petitions.

(2.) The question posed for determination is whether the Civil Court, even when it is competent to try an Election Petition as empowered under Section 88 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, for short, the 'Panchayat Raj Act', has jurisdiction to examine the disqualification imputed over the community of a candidate when his claim as a member of Scheduled caste/tribe is supported by a certificate issued under the provisions of the Kerala (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Regulation of issue of Community Certificates Act, 1996 (Act 11 of 1996), for short, the K (SC & ST) RICC Act and the Kerala (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Rules, 2002, for short the K (SC & ST) RICC Rules, 2002. Since the K (SC & ST) RICC Act and K (SC & ST) RICC Rules provide for a mechanism to examine the genuineness of a certificate issued in relation to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Section 24 of the Act oust the jurisdiction of the Civil Court in respect of any order passed by any officer or authority under the Act, it cannot examine even in an Election Petition disqualification imputed against the election of the returned candidate as not being a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is the challenge canvassed in these revisions.

(3.) Adv. Sri. S. Sreekumar appeared for the revision petitioner in C.R.P. No. 834 of 2007 and Adv. Sri Joice George, for the revision petitioner in C.R.P. No. 252 of 2008. Adv. Sri. Liji J. Vadakedom appeared for the 1st respondent and Adv. Sri. K.T. Shyamkumar for the 2nd respondent in C.R.P. No. 834 of 2007 and Adv. Sri. Mathew John for the 1st respondent in C.R.P. No. 252 of 2008.