Back
2020 Supreme(Online)(KER) 10334
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J
KALLADICHOLA HARIJAN COLONY COMMITTEE(I.H.D.P COLONY) – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
WP(C)/4719/2020
SRI.M.VIVEK RABINDRANATH, SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI, SRI.K.J.MANU RAJ, GOVT,PLEADER, SRI.K.V.PRAKASH, Special Government Pleader
The court upheld that constructions funded for SC welfare can be located near SC residences, irrespective of formal boundaries, affirming protections against discrimination under existing legislation.
Headnote:
Atrocities - Scheduled Caste Community - Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(v) - The Act aimed to prevent atrocities against Scheduled Castes, emphasizing that any discriminatory act targeting their welfare and rights is punishable under this provision.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an association for residents in a Scheduled Caste colony, contended that plans to build a cultural center outside their colony violated their rights and aimed to divert funds improperly. They challenged a government decision allowing the construction in this location.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the decision to construct the cultural center justified as it was close to the majority of SC families. It ruled that the center's location did not infringe upon the community's rights, affirming that there was no demarcated colony boundary.
Issues: Whether the decision to construct the cultural center outside the scheduled caste colony's alleged boundaries constitutes a grievance under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the absence of a fixed colony boundary, along with the proximity of the cultural center's site to a significant number of SC residents, rendered the petitioner's claims untenable.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as the construction was valid and appropriately located.
J U D G M E N T
The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows:
“(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari calling for records leading to Exhibit-P5 order and to quash the original of the same.
(b) That this Hon'ble court may be pleased to declare that the project envisaged by Exhibit-P2 shall be constructed inside the Kalladichola Harijan colony and not to be shifted outside the colony.
(c) That this Hon'ble court may be pleased to declare that diversion of SCP fund meant for SC community for construction of Samskarika Nilayam inside the colony, amounts to atrocities committed against Scheduled caste as defined U/S 3(1)(v) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and that the respondents are liable for appropriate action.
(d) For such other and further orders as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.”
2. Heard Sri.V.T.Madhavanunni, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.K.V.Prakash, learned Special Government Pleader for SC/ST Department, appearing for respondents 1 to 5 &
9.
3. The petitioner is stated to be an association of persons formed for the benefit of the residents of 'Kalladichola Harijan Colony' and their grievance is that attempts are being made by the ::4::
official respondents to construct a 'Samskarika Nilayam' (Cultural Centre) for the benefit of the scheduled caste members and that the cultural centre is now sought to be constructed in a place which is beyond the confines of the said colony of scheduled caste persons, which is stated to be more than 5 kms. away from the colony, etc. According to the petitioner, the cultural centre has been sought to be constructed under a project, which is funded under the Special Component Fund for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the cultural centre cannot be set up anywhere else other than the territorial limits of the said colony and the attempt of the official respondents to construct the 'Samskarika Nilayam' outside the limits of the said colony, where the members of the scheduled caste colony are residing, is illegal and should be interdicted.
4. This Court had earlier considered the grievance of the petitioner and has rendered Ext.P-4 judgment dated 5.12.2019 in W.P.(C).No.4553/2019 filed by the petitioner herein whereby this Court without getting into the merits of the controversy has held that the Secretary of the respondent-District Panchayath, Kozhikode, should afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard ::5::
to the President of the Association and the Secretary of the respondent-Grama Panchayath and then may issue appropriate proceedings in the matter after assessing their rival contentions on merits, etc., and this was directed to be done within one month. Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, the 2nd respondent- Secretary of the District Panchayath, Kozhikode, has afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and other persons concerned and issued proceedings dated 16.1.2020 as per Ext.P-5 rejecting the claims and contentions of the petitioner and finding that the proposed construction of the cultural centre in the present location is justified and is not liable to be interfered with. It is this proceedings at Ext.P-5 that is essentially under challenge in this writ proceedings.
5. Both sides have been heard in extenso for occasions for more than one. The 2nd respondent-Secretary of the District Panchayat, Kozhikode, has filed an affidavit dated 11.3.2020 through the learned Special Government Pleader and the 9th respondent-Director of Scheduled Castes Development Department has also filed a statement dated 9.3.2020 in this case. The respondents through the above pleadings have supported the ::6::
above stand made out in Ext.P-5 proceedings. One of the essential findings made in Ext.P-5 proceedings is to the effect that altogether there are 31 families, who are members of the scheduled castes and who are residing in the area in ques
