T. KOCHA versus STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

Citation: [2016] 3 S.C.R. 368 · Decided: 13-04-2016 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SIKRI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 368 
T. KOCHA 
v. 
STATE OF KERALA & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 6126-6127 of2013) 
APRIL 13, 2016 
[A.K. SIKRI AND R.K. AGRAWAL, JJ.] 
Social status: Thandan community - Appellant applied for 
the post of High School Assistant in a Government School under 
reserved category claiming herself to be Scheduled Ca.,fe as 
belonging to Thandan Community - She was appointed to the said 
post on 3.2.1989 - However, subsequentZv Vigilance Cell held that 
she did not belong to Thandan Community but was a member of 
Ezhava!Thiyya Community and therefore was not a person belonging 
to Scheduled Caste Community - In the instant appeals, the issue in 
dispute is regarding the status of appellant as to whether she belongs 
to Thandmi Community or not - Held: Ajier judgment of Pa/ghat 
Ji/la :1·. Ezhuvas and Thiyyas who are also known as Thandan in the 
erstwhile Cochin and Malabar are no longer Scheduled Castes in 
the State of Kera/a - However, this amendment is prospective and, 
therefore, the said changed position become effective only from 
30.8.2007, the da.te when the amendment was notified - The 
appellant was treated as Thandan and, thus, belonging to Scheduled 
Caste Community on the basis of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled 
Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976 and she was appointed as 
High School Assistant on 3.2.1989 treating her as Scheduled Casie 
- The posilion changed only w.ef 30.8.2007 with the Amendment 
Act of 2007 when Thiyyas and Ezhuvas were not lo be treated as 
part of Thandan and, thus, Scheduled Caste but those who were 
already conferred the benefit were entitled to continue lo reap the 
fruit thereof - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders 
(A111end111f!1Jt) Act, 1976 - Conslilution of lndia, 1950 -Articles 341, 
366(24) - Constitution Scheduled Castes (Modification) Order, 
1956 - Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: The appellant was treated as Thandan and, thus, 
H 
belonging to Scheduled Caste Community on the basis of 
368 
T. KOCHA v. STATE OF KERALA & ORS. 
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders .(Amendment) 
Act, 1976 and she was appointed as High School Assistant 
(Physical Science) in Government _School on 3.2.1989 treating · 
her as Scheduled Caste: ·The -position changes only w.e.f. 
30.8.2007 with the Amendment Act of 2007 when Thiyyas and 
Ezhuvas are not to be treated as part of Thandan and, thus, 
Scheduled Caste but those who have already conferred the benefit 
would be entitled to continue to reap the fruit thereof. Since the 
appellants have been continued in service because of the interim 
order passed by this Court, they are treated as validly appointed 
giving them the benefit of members of Scheduled Caste category. 
(Paras 11, 13) (377-E,G; 378-A] -. 
Pa/ghat Jilla Thandan Samudhaya Samrakshna Samithi 
and another v. State of Kerala and another (1994) 1 
SCC 359: 1993. (3) Suppl. SCR 872; Unnikrishnan and 
another v. V.K Mahanudevan and others (2014) 4 SCC 
434:2014 (1) SCR 350 - relied on. 
Case Law Reference 
1993 (3) Suppl. SCR 872 
relied on 
Para3 
2014 (1) SCR 350 
relied on 
Paras 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 6126-
6127 of20I3 
WITH 
C.A.No.11377of2011 
From the Judgment and Order dated 05.09.2012 of the High Court 
of Kerala at Ernaku lam in M. F. A. No. 118 of 2004 and order dated· 
07.02.2013 in R. P. No. I 224 of 2012. 
Ms. V. P. Seemanthini. Sr. Adv., Nishe Rajen Shonk.er, Ms. Anu 
K. Joy. Advs. for the Appellant. 
R. P. Bhatt, Sr. Adv, .logy Scaria, M. T. George, Ms. P. Chaturvedi, 
Ms. Liz Mathew, Ramesh Babu M. R., A. V. Rangam, Buddy A. 
Ranganadhan, D. V. Raghu Vamsy, Alok K. Jain, Aditya Gaggar, 0. P. 
Gaggar, Advs. for the Respondents. 
369 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
370 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016) 3 S.C.R. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
A.K. SIKRI, J. 1. In these appeals, the legal issue which needs 
determination is identical. The background facts under which the said 
issue arises are also somewhat similar. Therefore, without being 
repetitive, it would serve our purpose to take note of the facts appearing 
in Civil Appeal Nos. 6126-6127 of2013 in order to spell out the issue 
involved and decision thereupon shall govern both the appeals. 
2. The appellant in Civil Appeal Nos. 6126-6127 of2013 is T. 
Kocha who claims to be the member of the Thandan Community, which 
is a Scheduled Caste in the State ofKerala
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.