HC sets aside TN Govt clarification on eligibility for quota

Chennai, Apr 13 (UNI) Madras High Court today set aside a clarification issued by Tamil Nadu Government that as per a decision of the Supreme Court, a Christian by birth, on conversion to Hinduism shall neither be eligible to get Schedule Caste (SC) certificate nor be eligible to enjoy benefits of reservation.

A Division Bench comprising Mr Justice S J Mukhopadhya and Mr Justice V Dhanapalan set aside the clarification while disposing of a petition filed by Prof.I Elangovan of Voorhees College, Vellore challenging a letter dated September 19, 2000 of Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, in which the department referring to the apex Court judgement of May 25, 1996, clarified that as per this, a Christian by birth on conversion to Hinduism shall neither be eligible to get SC certificate and enjoy the benefit of reservation.

In its order, the bench said it was not inclined to accept such submission. First of all, judicial propriety does not allow this court to make any observation with regard to the judgement rendered by the Supreme Court irrespective of the number of judges who decided it. The decision was binding on parties. The ratio and the law laid by the apex court was binding on all the court, the bench added.

According to the petitioner, his parents were Hindu Adi Dravidar who had embraced Christianity in 1940 and reconverted to Hinduism in 1973 along with their seven children, including him. He was given a community certificate that he belongs to SC.

His grievance was that due to the clarification he and those in a similar situation, would not get the benefit to which a member of SC was entitled.

According to the counsel for the petitioner the clarification was against the Constitutional Bench decision of the Supreme Court in Gundur Medical College Vs.Y Mohan Rao case. The Supreme Court, in the Swvigaradoss Vs. Zonal Manager Food Corporation of India (1996) case had observed that the petitioner was born to Christian parents and his parents also were converted prior to his birth. They no longer remained to be Adi Dravida.

The Counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the Supreme Court Bench while deciding the S Swvigaradoss case did not bring to the notice of the court, the decision of the Constitutional bench (five judges) in the Gunturr medical college case.

UNI