N.K. Jain, A.C.J.

1. All these appeals involve the same question of fact and law. As agreed, they are being heard together.

2. In the Writ Appeal No: 1082 of 1992 a Division Bench of this Court considered the question of the implication of reservation of certain seats for children of inter-caste marriages with preference to children born to spouses to whom one is a member of a Schedule Caste or a Schedule Tribe.

3. While considering the view taken by a Division Bench of this Court in Hari Ganeshs case, AIR 1987 Mad. 55, the Division Bench thought that another view also would be possible taking into view the following points:

I. When a child born of a forward and the schedule caste spouse ordinarily will take the interior caste (See Maines Hindu Law) and thus shall be entitled to the reservation for the class under which the Schedule Caste belongs. Will then the reservation of seat for the reason of such a child born to a spouse of whom one or the other member is a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe not mean a further reservation besides the reservation based on caste and thus violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

II. Can there be any preference for one