Om Prakash, C.J.

Heard counsel for the parties.

2. The question that arises for consideration in this appeal directed against the judgment dated March 6,1996 is: whether the petitioner in the Original Petitions can be deprived of the benefit available to the Scheduled Caste candidates.

3. It is not disputed that as per the Government Order dated 25.1.1977 (Ext. P6) in O.P. No. 11231/95, the children horn to inter-caste marriages are entitled to educational concessions given to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe candidates, as the case may be, provided either of the parents of such candidates belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community, as the case may be.

4. In the instant case, it is not disputed that the mother of the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste. The father of the petitioner belongs to another community, which is not covered by Scheduled castes.

5. By order dated 31.3.1995 (Ext. P5 in O.P. No. 11231/95), the Government held that in the S.S.L.C. book of the petitioner, the caste of the petitioner was recorded as 'Nadar', that is, the caste which her father belongs to. It is for this reason, the Government took the stand that the petitioner is not entit