LexC. SELVARANI versus THE SPECIAL SECRETARY-CUM-DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 1504 : 2024 INSC 900 C. Selvarani v. The Special Secretary-Cum-District Collector and Others (Civil Appeal No. 13086 of 2024) 26 November 2024 [Pankaj Mithal and R. Mahadevan,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the appellant is entitled to the Scheduled Caste community certificate, indicating that she belongs to Valluvan caste, which is recognized as one of the Scheduled Castes in the S.C. Order, 1964. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art. 341 – Constitution (Pondicherry) Scheduled Castes Order, 1964 – Appellant was selected for the post of Upper Division Clerk under the Scheduled Caste category – Respondent Authorities directed her to produce the original latest community, residence and nativity certificates issued by the Tahsildar – Appellant applied for the same – Her application was rejected by the respondent no.3 on the ground that she does not profess Hinduism, Buddhism and Sikhism and therefore, the community certificate under the S.C. Order, 1964, could not be issued to her – The said rejection was affirmed by the Appellate Authorities as well as by the High Court – Correctness: Held: The report submitted by the Village Administrative Officer, after a detailed enquiry and through the documentary evidence collected, would clearly establish that the appellant’s father belonged to Scheduled Caste community and the appellant’s mother was a Christian and their marriage was performed as per the Christian rituals and was duly registered – Thereafter, the appellant’s father had converted to Christianity through baptism and when the appellant was born, she was also baptized – Therefore, it is clear that the appellant was a born Christian and she would not be entitled to claim the certificate under Scheduled Caste *Author [2024] 11 S.C.R. 1505 C. Selvarani v. The Special Secretary-Cum-District Collector and Others Category – The said facts were also admitted by four persons of the same village – They also stated that appellant regularly attended the church activities and her name found place in the Church’s baptismal register – As far as reconversion of appellant and her family to Hinduism is concerned, there is no positive act to evince such conversion – There is no public record to show that she or her family has reconverted to Hinduism and on the contrary, there is a factual finding that the appellant still professes Christianity – In the instant case, the appellant was a born Christian and could not be associated with any caste – In any case, upon conversion to Christianity, one loses her caste and cannot be identified by it – In view of that, in terms of the S.C. Order, 1964, as per which, the Scheduled Caste community certificate can be issued only to a person who is professing either Hinduism Sikhism or Buddhism, the appellant is not entitled to the Scheduled Caste community certificate. [Paras 11, 12, 14] Constitution of India – Art. 25 – Conversion to derive the benefits of reservation – Not permitted: Held: Every citizen has a right to practise and profess a religion of their choice as guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution – One converts to a different religion, when he/she is genuinely inspired by its principles, tenets and spiritual thoughts – However, if the purpose of conversion is largely to derive the benefits of reservation but not with any actual belief on the other religion, the same cannot be permitted, as the extension of benefits of reservation to people with such ulterior motive will only defeat the social ethos of the policy of reservation – In the instant case, the evidence presented clearly demonstrates that the appellant professes Christianity and actively practices the faith by attending church regularly – Despite the same, she claims to be a Hindu and seeks for Scheduled Caste community certificate for the purpose of employment – Such a dual claim made by her is untenable and she cannot continue to identify herself as a Hindu after baptism – Therefore, the conferment of Scheduled caste communal status to the appellant, who is a Christian by religion, but claims to be still embracing Hinduism only for the purpose of availing reservation in employment, would go against the very object of reservation and would amount to fraud on the Constitution. [Para 15] 1506 [2024] 11 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports Case Law Cited State of Maharashtra v. Ravi Prakash Babulalsing Parmar [2006] Supp. 8 SC
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.