http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5  

PETITIONER: S. NAGARAJAN

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,SALEM & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       13/01/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R.      Leave granted.      The appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Division  Bench of  the Madras High Court made on August 19,1996 in writ Appeal No.166 of 1996.      The appellant  claimed his  status as  scheduled  tribe (Konda Reddy)  and had  appeared in  central civil  services Examination held  in 1985,  his status  was doubted  by  the union public  service commission and an enquiry was directed to be  made. During  enquiry, the  Tehsildar found  that the certificated of  social status given by the Deputy Tehsildar was not correct and was without jurisdiction and accordingly cancelled the  said certificate.  the appellant filed a writ petition and  the high  court directed fresh enquiry in that behalf after  giving notice  to the  appellant After  giving notice the  Tehsildar cancelled the certificate given to the appellant which  was again challenged by way of another writ petition. The  High Court  again directed that the matter be enquired by  the R.D.O.  The R.D.O. also found the appellant to be  not a  scheduled  Tribe.  the  appellant  made  third attempt by  filing writ petition in the High Court. The High court directed  the collector to personally enquire into the matter after  giving reasonable opportunity to the appellant and to  pass a  speaking order. thereafter the collector did not belong  to the  scheduled tribe  community, Calling that action in  question,  the  appellant  filed  writ  petition. Learned Single  Judge by order dated December 18,1995 upheld the order  of the  District Collector  with the finding that the appellant  was given  opportunity to  prove  his  tribal traits and  also that  the appellant  was unable to give any proof in  support of  his claim that he belongs to scheduled tribe community  and as  such the certificate granted by the Deputy Tehsildar  was rightly  cancelled  as  the  same  was without jurisdiction. It was also found that the parsons who had stated  earlier in  favor of  the appellant  as  to  his community and status at the behest of the appellant’s father who retired  as commissioner  resiled thereafter. Therefore, their  statements   that  the  appellant  a  member  of  the scheduled tribes could not be relied upon. Learned Judge has also accepted the reasoning of the collector that the father

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5  

of the  appellant who  was in  Government  service  had  not claimed his  status to  be a member of scheduled tribe . Had he been  a  member  of  scheduled  tribe  community  it  was unlikely that  he would  have  omitted  to  claim  his  said status. In  the school  certificate of  the  appellant,  his caste was originally noted as Hindu Reddiar and subsequently the word  "Konda" had  been added.  Equally, in entry in the school admission  register the  caste as originally noted as Hindu Reddiar  and subsequently  the word  "Konda" was added subsequently, that  too in  different ink . In other words , he is a member of forward caste and there is no signature on the  correction   of  word   ’konda’  by   the  concerned  . Headmaster. Thus,  it appears  to have been so made as to be consistent  with   the  interpolation  made  in  the  school certificate of  the appellant.  Having regard to these facts the learned single judge has held thus:      "13. The fact that the petitioner’s      father subsequently claimed to be a      joint secretary of the Madurai unit      of   the    state    konda    Reddy      Association and  the  president  of      that Association  claimed to  be  a      grand uncle  of the petitioner does      not   help    the   petitioner   to      establish his  claim that  he is  a      kondareddi.           14.   The    petitioner    was      required to  establish  before  the      collector  that   he  belonged   to      kondareddi community No attempt was      made to  establish that the customs      and his  family are  those  of  the      tribal group  of  kondareddi,  what      was sought to be established by the      petitioner  was   that  in  certain      documents such  as school admission      register and sale deeds the cast of      the petitioner of his relatives was      mentioned   as    kondareddi   such      description  of   the  petitioner’s      father  had  become  aware  of  the      benefit    available     to     the      kondareddi, even  though he himself      at no point of time claimed to have      belong to  the scheduled  available      to  from   a  reliable   basis  for      holding that  the petitioner  is  a      kondareddi, his membership of tribe      has   to    be   established   with      reference   not   merely   to   his      documents wherein not merely to the      documents   wherein   he   of   his      relatives    are    described    as      kondareddi, but by establishing the      customs habits  or  anthropological      dated   concerning    the    family      from  which  one  could  reasonably      conclude   that    the   petitioner      belongs to the tribe of kondareddi,      No such  evidence was  produced  by      the petitioner".      It would thus be seen that the documentary evidence was brought on  record to prop up retrograde status of scheduled tribe to  snatch the  constitutional benefits  given to  the scheduled tribes.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5  

    The Division  Bench after  considering these  facts has held thus:      ".........  About  the  documentary      proof let in by the petitioner, the      father’s case  is the  proper proof      to know  the caste  of his  son. In      the school  admission register, the      caste  of   the  writ  petitioner’s      father  Thiru   N.  Siddaraddi  was      originally noted  as ’Hindu  Reddi’      only. Subsequently,        the word      ’konda has  been written  in it  in      brackets and  that too in different      ink The  corrections have  not been      attested  by   the  headmaster.   A      certificate issued  on 2.7.1953  by      the village   Munsif of kannamoochi      has been  pasted in  the  admission      register which  does not  bear  the      initial   of   signature   of   the      Headmaster for  having accepted  it      . In the transfer certificate dated      16.6.1955 also  his caste  has been      originally noted  as Hindu  Reddiar      and subsequently  the word  ’konda’      has been added. Even accepting that      the  correction  in  the  Admission      Register had  actually been made in      the  year   1953  itself   on   the      strength of  the  Village    Munsif      certificate     dated     2.7.1953,      the caste  in the  T.C. would  have      been noted  as Hindu konda Reddi in      the first  instance itself. Even in      the service  Register of Siddareddy      it has  been noted  as  Hindu/Reddi      (konda). Hence it is patently clear      that the  caste noted  in  patently      clear that  the caste  noted in the      admission    register    was    not      corrected in  the year 1953 but was      corrected long  after the  entry of      Thiru  Siddareddy  into  government      service . The other documents filed      by the  petitioner do  not  support      the claim  that the writ petitioner      is a kondareddi.           2.  It   is   an   established      position   of   law   that   though      jurisdiction under  Art.226 of  the      constitution    is     wide,    but      nevertheless it cannot be exercised      as an appellate jurisdiction and it      is  not   open  to  this  court  to      appreciate the  evidence stand come      to its own conclusion as long as it      is  show   that  the  fact  finding      authority    has    followed    the      provision  of   law  correctly  and      appreciated  the   evidence  in   a      reasonable manner.  In other  words      the approach  of the  fact  finding      authority not  being  perverse  and      unreasonable and not being vitiated      by non-consideration  of the of the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5  

    evidence on  record, the  fact that      this Court  can come to a different      conclusion   on   the   very   same      evidence would  not be a ground for      interference. Added  to that  would      not be  a round  for  interference.      Added to that , while considering a      similar issue, the supreme court in      Madhuri   Patil    V.    Additional      commissioner   tribal   Development      (A.I.R. 1995  S.C. 94)  has held as      follows:           "The question  then is whether      the approach  adopted by  the  high      court    in     not     elaborately      considering the case is vitiated by      an error  of law. High Court is not      a Court of appeal to appreciate the      evidence. the  committee  which  is      empowered to  evaluate the evidence      placed  before  it  when  record  a      finding  of   fact,  it   ought  to      prevail unless  found  vitiated  by      judicial review  of any  High Court      subject    to     limitations    of      interference with findings of fact.      The committee  when  considers  all      the material  facts  and  record  a      finding, though  another view, as a      court of  appeal may be possible it      is not  a  ground  to  reverse  the      findings.  The  court  has  to  see      whether  the  committee  considered      all the  relevant  material  placed      before it  or has  not applied  its      mind to  relevant facts  which have      led   the    committee   ultimately      recorded  the  finding.  Each  case      must be considered in the back drop      of its own facts."           3. Further,  in  a  case  link      this the  determining factor is the      community to  which the  father  of      the writ  petitioner  belonged.  In      the writ  petitioner  belonged.  In      the instant  case the father of the      writ petitioner  never claimed that      he was  a kondareddi even though he      was    a     Government    servant.      kondareddy  is   recognised  as   a      scheduled   tribe.    Any    person      entitled to  such a  benefit, would      never fail  to avail such a benefit      would  never   fail  to   the  writ      petitioner  was  a  kondareddy,  as      such he  was a  scheduled tribe and      entitled to all the benefits he had      not done  so the  community of  the      father of  the writ  petitioner, in      paragraph  12   has   observed   as      follows:           "It    is     apparent    that      petitioner’s father was fully aware      when he  entered father  was  fully      aware when  he  entered  government

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5  

    service that  he did  not belong to      any   scheduled    tribe   he   has      attempted to  take advantage of the      name ‘Redd’  being part of the name      of scheduled  tribe  ‘konda  Reddy’      so that  the same may be entered in      the  petitioner’s   school  records      such  entries   cannot  confer  the      status  of   scheduled  tribes  the      claim made  on the  basis  of  such      records is  in the  words  of  apex      Court in  the case of Madhuri Patil      is one of pseudo status’".      The court in several cases has negatived the claim even when  the   claimants  father  had  enjoyed  the  status  of scheduled tribe  on the  basis of  the finding  made in  the enquiry that  basis of  the finding made in the enquiry that he did  not belong  to scheduled  tribes. this is a converse case.      Shri Vaidyanathan, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant  contends that  view expressed  by  the  court below is  not correct  and in  view of  the  fact  that  the appellant’s grand  father had  entered the  status of  konda Reddy a  scheduled tribe  prior to  1949 it is unlikely that the appellant  would fabricated the records and claim the to appreciate  the   evidence  the   collector  after  detailed consideration of  the evidence  placed by the petitioner has concluded that  the appellant  is not  a member  of schedule tribe (konda  Reddy) his  farther, N.  Siddwareddi had never claimed this  status though in the ordinary course he  would have  claimed   to  be  belonging  to  the  scheduled  tribe community to  avail the  benefit  of  reservation  available under state  service the  learned single  judge was right in concluding  that  the  appellant’s  father  having  been  in government service  would not  have  omitted  to  claim  his status as  belonging to scheduled tribe had he really been a member of  scheduled tribe  community (konda  Reddy). on the other hand his father was reddy which is a forward caste and that therefore  the subsequent interpolation that other hand his father  was reddy  which is  a  forward  cast  and  that therefore the subsequent ( interpolation) is not genuine and an incorrect  document was  thus brought  into existence  to claim the  status as  scheduled tribe it is obvious that the constitution intended  of status  and dignity  of person  by providing reservation  in  services  of  the  state  and  in education by  operation of  Articles of  person by providing reservation in  services of  the state  and in  education by operation of  Articles 15,16  and 14 of the constitution and that therefore  only the persons who are member of scheduled tribes and  scheduled  castes  alone  are  entitled  to  the benefit By  interpolation of  the documents  none can  get a particular social  status unless it is recognised as per the presidential notification/order  under Article 341 or 342 to avail of  the benefit of reservation made in that behalf the High  court   was  therefore,   correct  in   accepting  the conclusion reached  by the  collector that the appellant had not established his status as scheduled tribe.      The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.