The entitlement to caste status for children of inter-caste marriages is based on upbringing and societal acceptance, notwithstanding their parent's caste.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2025

The writ petition is preferred challenging Ext.P15 anthropological report and proceedings of the 3^rd respondent and Ext.P23 proceedings of the 1^st respondent, whereby, the Government has rejected the status of Scheduled Caste (Cheruman) in revision.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner’s grand-father had married a lady belonging to the Ezhava community. However, all the children born in the said wedlock were brought up by their father in his own social circumstances, following the customs of his community, i.e, Cheruman. Accordingly, the father of the petitioner was brought up as a member of the Cheruman community, which is evident from Exts.P1 to P4 caste certificates.

3. It is contended that the petitioner’s father was subjected to the same disabilities, disadvantages, social, economical and educational backwardness as members of the said community. Additionally, the father of the petitioner has also married, outside his caste, from the Dheevara community. The petitioner is the eldest of the two children in the said wedlock. Both children were brought up as members of the Cheruman community and were also subjected to the disabilities of the Scheduled Caste community. Even in the school register, the caste of the children has been entered as Cheruman. Moreover, they are known in the general public as members of the Cheruman community, as evidenced by Exts.P5 to P14 certificates.

4. However, based solely on the entry of caste status in the school register of the father of the petitioner, the respondent found that the petitioner is not eligible for the benefit of reservation to the professional degree course under the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe quota by Ext.P15 report and Ext.P17 order. Exts.P15 report and P17 order are stated to be illegal and perverse, and the same were challenged before this Court. By Ext.P18 judgment, this Court directed the petitioner to approach the respondent by filing a revision petition. Accordingly, Ext.P19 revision was preferred before the 2^nd respondent, which culminated in Ext.P20 order.

5. The petitioner claims the benefit of Ext.P21 Government Order, which governs the caste status of children born to parents in inter-caste marriage. The said Government Order was issued in the light of the Full Bench decision of this Court in Indira v. State of Kerala [2005(4) KLT 119 (F.B)], wherein it was held that children born in inter-caste marriages, where one of the parents belongs to a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe, can claim the status of a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe on proof of the traditions, acceptance, customary rites etc, under which such children are brought up.

6. Even thereafter, by Ext.P23, the Government, in revision, has rejected the claim of the petitioner to be treated as belonging to the Cheruman community, on the basis of the recommendation made by the Scrutiny Committee. This is under challenge in this writ petition.

7. However, going by Ext.P15 report of KIRTADS, especially the genealogy contained therein, it is seen that the petitioner’s grand-father, who belonged to the Cheruman community, married late Nalinakshi, who belonged to the Thiyya community. Seven children were born in the said wedlock, all of whom had the status of members of the Cheruman community. Except for the petitioner’s father, the majority of them married within the same community. The petitioner’s father, however, married from the Dheevara community, which is the other eligible backward community that comes under the category of ‘OEC’. This led to the categorization of the petitioner’s father as ‘Thiyya’ in Ext.P15 anthropological report. The petitioner’s father completed his school education