ORDER

The appellant had contested election from 72 Bethamangala Assembly Constituency of Karnataka State Legisilature as reserved candidate. The appellant claimed the status of Mundala which is a recognised Scheduled Caste notified by the President of India in exercise of power under Article 341(1) of the Constitution. He contested the said election on that basis and stood elected. When an election petition was laid by the first respondent, the High Court found that the caste to which the appellant belongs is Mondy/Mondigaru. The High Court on the basis of evidence on record found that the appellant, in fact, belongs to Mondy/Mondigaru caste which was not recognised as a Scheduled Caste in the Presidential notification. Therefore, the High Court declared by the impugned order dated April 30, 1987 passed in Election Petition No.21 of 1985 that his election to the Assembly constituency allotted to the Scheduled Caste was not valid in law. Thus this appeal.

2. The question before us is: whether the status of the appellant who is a Mondy/Mondigaru, can be considered as Mundala - a Scheduled Caste synonym, for the purpose of election to the Legislative Assembly? Article 341 reads thus :

"3