Conversion is permissible and benefit of reservation is also available.

B. Subhashan Reddy, CJ.

1. This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of quo warranto against the first respondent, who is a District Judge, on the ground that he got into the post of District Judge as a Scheduled Caste even though he is not a Scheduled Caste and is a Christian.

2. The petitioner is a practising advocate and submits that a post of District Judge was notified in the year 1987, that the said post, according to roster, was reserved for Scheduled Caste, that the first respondent, even though belonging to Christian faith, had falsely claimed the status of Scheduled Caste, applied for the said post, got selected and then is performing the functions of District Judge, that he was not and is not a Scheduled Caste even now, that he is a Christian and is still practising Christian faith not only himself but also his wife, children and all other family members and that he should forthwith be interdicted from acting any further as a District Judge.

3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the first respondent. The second respondent Government has produced the records. The third respondent, Registrar General, High Court, has filed the counter affidavit. The fourth respondent, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, is neither a necessary nor a proper party. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder to the counter of the first respondent.

4. The petitioner avers in the pleadings that the first respondent is still a Christian and is a Member of Parish of St. Antony’s Church in Alavanthankulam, that he had been paying taxes levied by the Church, that he had been sending donations to the said Church regularly and that during the last three months, he donated Rs.3,000.00, that he had married off his daughter to a Christian viz. Arul Rajendran, that his marriage with Ms. Ebi was performed according to Christian rites and that the first responden t, his wife and children are still Christians professing Christian faith and visiting Churches. These facts are disputed by the first respondent. The first respondent counters that he performed Suddhi ceremony at Arya Samaj for re-conversion as Hindu on 11.4.1971, that pursuant thereto, a certificate was issued by Arya Samaj converting him as a, Hindu on 5.8.1971, that application for Gazette publication was made on 9.9.1971 regarding conversion from Christianity to Hinduism, that application was made on 13.10.1971 for Gazette publication for change of Christian name S. Antony Samy to Hindu name S. Ashok Kumar and Gazette publication for conversion to Hinduism was made on 15.5.1974. The first respondent also states that his marriage with Ms. Ebi was performed on 9.9.1973 according to Hindu rites at his residence at Thenkulam Pudur Village. He further submits that he contested for the Assembly Constituency of Ottapidaram, reserved for Scheduled Castes, during the year 1987, that he led procession on 30 .10.1980 condemning rape of 17 Harijan women resulting in his arrest and prosecution and later on, he had also appeared before Ramamurthi Commission of Inquiry during 1980-81, that Commission of Inquiry in its report in 1982, lauded the first respondent’s efforts in leading the procession, that in Sessions Case No.50 of 1985, he was acquitted by judgment dated 9.12.1985, that Tahsildar has issued a community certificate dated 28.11.1980 and so also the Joint Commissioner of Land Administration on 23.12. 1985 and that all these facts and documents show unequivocally that he had converted to Hinduism, that his conversion was accepted by his community and the society and that he never visits Churches but visits Temples and he is also donating monies to Hindu Temples.

5. The Government had issued a notification dated 16.12.1985 inviting applications for appointment by direct recruitment to the post of District Judges Grade II governed by the Tamil Nadu State Higher Judicial Service. Out of the three posts notified, one was meant for Open Competition, one was for Scheduled Castes and