K.P. MANU versus CHAIRMAN, SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR VERIFICATION OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE

Citation: [2015] 3 S.C.R. 243 · Decided: 26-02-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 3 S.C.R. 243 
K.P. MANU 
v. 
CHAIRMAN, SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR 
VERIFICATION OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE 
(Civil Appeal No. 7065 of 2008) 
FEBRUARY 26, 2015 
A 
8 
[DIPAK MISRA AND V. GOPALA GOWDA, JJ.] 
C 
·Kera/a (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) 
Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1996 
- Grant of caste certificate - Challenge to - Appellant born 
to Christian parents, his grandfather embraced the 0 
Christianity after leaving Hinduism and the appellant 
converted to Hindu at the age of 24 -
Grant of caste 
certificate of 'Hindu Pulaya' to which his ancestors 
belonged - Scrutiny committee as also High Court holding 
that he could not be treated as a Hindu - Sustainability E 
of - Held: Not sustainable - For grant of scheduled caste 
status, person must belong to the caste recognised by the 
Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, there should 
be reconversion to the original religion to which the 
forefathers belonged; and should be accepted by the F 
community -Appellant after reconversion had come within 
the fold of the community, and thereby became a member 
of the Scheduled Caste - Had the community expelled 
him, the matter would have been different - Acceptance 
is in continuum - Appellant's marriage to a Christian lady G 
and non-production of any evidence for leading the life of 
a Hindu would not make any difference - Appel/an( to be 
243 
H 
244 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 3 S.C.R. 
A ·reinstated in service forthwith with all the benefits relating 
to seniority and his caste and also be paid back wages 
upto 75 per cent - Social status certificate. 
B 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 Three things that need to be established 
by a person who claims to be a beneficiary of the caste 
certificate are (i) there must be absolutely clear cut 
proof that he belongs to the caste that has been 
c . recognised by the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) 
Order, 1950; (ii) there has been reconversion to the 
original religion to which the parents and earlier 
generations had belonged; and (iii) there has to be 
evidence establishing the acceptance by the 
D community. Each aspect is very significant, and if one 
is not substantiated, the recognition would not be 
possible. [Para 34] [278-D-E] 
1.2 If a person who is born to Christian parents who 
E had converted·to Christianity from the Scheduled Caste 
Hindu·can avail the benefit of the caste certificate after 
his embracing Hinduism subject to other qualifications, 
there cannot be any soundness of logic that he cannot 
avail the similar benefit because his grandparents were 
F converted and he was born to the parents who were 
Christians. They must have belonged to that caste and 
after conversion the community has accepted. Thus, the 
reasoning as ascribed by the Scrutiny Committee as 
well as by the High Court is unacceptable. [Para 35] 
G [278-F-G; 279-A] 
H 
• 
The Principal Guntur Medical College, Guntur & Ors. 
v. Y. Mohan Rao (1976) 3 SCC 411: 1976 (3) SCR 1046-
followed. 
S. Anbalagan v. B. Devarajan and others (1984) 2 SCC 
K.P. MANU v. CHAIRMAN, SCRUTINY COMM. FOR 
245 
VERIFICATION OF COMMUNITY CERT. 
112: 1984 (1) SCR 973 - relied on. 
A 
1.3 The first principle in S. Swvigaradoss's case 
that a court can look into the Notification by the 
President and the act of the Parliament under the 
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order B 
(Amendment) Act, 1976 and the schedule appended 
thereto for the limited purpose to find whether the 
castes, races or tribes are parts or groups within the 
caste, races or tribes, especially scheduled castes for 
the purpose of Constitution, and it is because what has c 
been included or excluded therein are conclusive, is 
concurred with. [Para 42] [284-C-D] 
S. Swvigaradoss v. Zonal Manager; F.C.I. (1996) 3 SCC 
100: 1996 (1) SCR 995 - relied on. 
D 
1.4 As far as the second principle in S. 
Swvigaradoss's case that a person born to Christian 
parents, who initially belonged to the Scheduled Caste, 
even after his reconversion cannot claim to be a 
Scheduled Caste, it is essential to note that the E 
authorities of larger Bench in Y. Mohan Rao case, 
Kai/ash Sonkar case and S. Anbalagan case were not 
brought to the notice of the Court. lrrefragably, the 
second principle runs contrary to the proposition laid F 
down in the Constitution Bench in Y. Mohan Rao's case 
and the decisions rendered by the three-Judge Bench. 
When a binding precedent is not taken note of ,and the 
ju

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.