N S ZIAUDDEEN Vs. S ASHOK KUMAR PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE RESIDING AT TOWER BLOCK TAYLORS ROAD KILPAUK CHENNAI 600010

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of quo warranto against the first respondent, who is a District Judge, on the ground that he got into the post of District Judge as a Scheduled Caste even though he is not a Scheduled Caste and is a Christian.

(2.) THE petitioner is a practising advocate and submits that a post of District Judge was notified in the year 1987, that the said post, according to roster, was reserved for Scheduled Caste, that the first respondent, even though belonging to Christian faith, had falsely claimed the status of Scheduled Caste, applied for the said post, got selected and then is performing the functions of District Judge, that he was not and is not a Scheduled Caste even now, that he is a Christian and is still practising Christian faith not only himself but also his wife, children and all other family members and that he should forthwith be interdicted from acting any further as a District Judge.

(3.) COUNTERING the arguments of the petitioner, Mr. G. Masilamani, learned senior counsel appearing for the first respondent, submits that the grandparents and the parents of the first respondent were Hindus belonging to Scheduled Castes,. but the . parents of the first respondent had got converted to Christianity and even though the first respondent was born as a Christian, he got converted to Hinduism and referred to the certificate issued by the Arya Samaj, the gazette publication recording conversion, the contest to Ottapidaram Assembly Constituency as a Scheduled Caste, leading of procession by the first respondent on 30.10.1980 agitating against the offence of rape of 17 Harijan women, report of Ramamurthi Commission, the judgment in Sessions Case No.50 of 1985 and the community certificate issued by the Tahsildar on 28.11.1980 and the Joint Commissioner of Land Administration dated 23.12.1985. Apart from the above, he has also referred to the documents of transfer dated 4.1.1927 and 3.9.1930 execut ed by the paternal grandmother of the first respondent representing as the first respondent's father's guardian to show that the grandparents and the father of the first respondent belonged to Pallan community of Scheduled Caste, and also a registered mortgage deed dated 20.8.1942 executed by the first respondent's father to show that in between the years 1930 and 1942, the first respondent's father got converted to Christianity. The learned senior counsel laid stress on the points of the conversion of the first respondent to Hinduism in view of Suddhi ceremony and the conversion certificate issued by the Arya Samaj in that regard and also the community certificate issued by the Tahsildar and the Joint Commissioner of Land Administration, the concern the first respondent shown when 17 Harijan women were raped and involving in criminal prosecution, contesting the same and getting acquittal and contesting the Assembly Constituency as a Scheduled Caste candidate, and contended that the above points amply prove that the first respondent had genuinely converted himself from Christianity to Hinduism and that on the date of notification inviting application for the selection to the post of District Judge, the first respondent was a Hindu and continued to be a Hindu even to this date and that the writ petition is also hit by laches. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that apart from the conversion, the first respondent whose ancestors belonged to Scheduled Caste of Hindu religion, had never lost his status as a Hindu and continued to be a Hindu in spite of his father's conversion to Christianity and the first respondent's birth as a Christian. Mr. G. Masilamani, learned senior counsel, further submits that the writ is for a quo warranto and its scope cannot be enlarged by calling for a report and then adjudicate on the basis of the said report, that neither the caste certificate of the first respondent nor his appointment as District Judge has been questioned and that so long as the caste certi ficate stands, the respondent cannot be ousted from service. The learned counsel has also submitted that the writ petition is barred by laches in view of long years of service put in by the first respondent. Mr. G. Masilamani, learned senior counsel, in support of his legal contentions, has cited the judgments of Supreme Court in Principal, Guntur Medical College, Guntur v. Y. Mohan Rao AIR 1976 S.C. 1904, C.M. Arumugam v. S. Rajagopal and others 1976 (1) S.C.C 863 : AIR 1976 S.C. 939, Kailash Sonkar v. Smt. Maya Devi , AIR 1984 S.C. 600 and S. Anbalagan v. B. Devarajan , AIR 1984 S.C. 411.