T MANI Vs. TAHSILDAR, THALASSERY TALUK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions have been filed by a certain Sri.T.Mani, claiming the benefits applicable to members of Scheduled Castes, for pursuing education for his two sons Sri.Vijay and Sri.Vishnu. Sri.Vishnu is not a petitioner in these cases, though Sri.Vijay is the second petitioner in W.P.(C) .No.27800/16.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the assertion of the petitioners is that Sri.Vishnu and Sri.Vijay are both entitled to the benefits of being reckoned as members of a particular Scheduled Caste because their father, Sri.T.Mani and their mother are both members of the said Scheduled Caste community. It appears that the Tahsildar refused to grant them the certificate when Sri.Vijay and Sri.Vishnu applied for it on the ground that the brother of Sri.T. Mani, a certain Sri.Ravi had already been found, consequent to an anthropological study, to be not the member of any recognized Scheduled Caste community in Kerala. On the basis that Sri.Ravi, who is the brother of Sri.T.Mani, is not a member of the Scheduled Caste, the Authorities declined the request made for by Sri.T.Mani and his two children for issuance of caste certificates. It are these orders that have been challenged in these writ petitions.

(3.) I have heard Sri.C.P.Peethambaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both the cases; Sri.K.V.Prakash, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1, 2 and 4 and Sri.M.Sasindran, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Kannur University in W.P.(C) .No.27800/2016.