JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved with the fact that, her son Joseph Daniel has not been granted a Certificate as a Scheduled Tribe 'Mala Araya'. The petitioner has not been issued with a Certificate showing her to be a Scheduled Tribe member. In fact Ext.P4 shows that the Tahsildar specifically had opined that the petitioner, who belonged to Hindu 'Mala Araya', converted herself to Christianity. The Certificate issued in favour of the son of the petitioner Joseph Daniel, is at Ext.P5. There also Joseph Daniel is said to be a 'Christian Mala Arayan'. Hence, it is clear that the petitioner's son was brought up as a Christian, being the caste of his father.

2. However, in Ext.P5, it is stated that the son would be eligible for educational and monetary benefits admissible to Scheduled Tribe as is provided in GO(MS) No.25/05/SC/ST/DD.

However, that would depend upon the circumstances in which the child is brought up.

3. Admittedly, the petitioner had converted to Christianity and had also married a Jacobite Christian, there is no case of reconversion projected. Further, inRameshbhai Dabhai Naika v. State of Gujarat [ (2012) 3 SCC 400 ], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the presu