ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the fourth respondent pertaining to the election to the post of “Bandahalli Panchayat President” of Nallampalli Panchayat Union and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to fourth respondent to declare the petitioner as the successful candidate in the elections held for the post of “Bandahalli Panchayat President” of Nallampalli Panchayat Union.

2. The specific case of the petitioner is that the fifth respondent has filed his nomination without a community certificate for participating in the elections for the Village Panchayat President Post in respect of Bandahalli Panchayat President of Nallampalli Panchayat Union which is a reserved constituency for the persons belonging to Scheduled Tribe Community. 3. It is submitted that the fifth respondent belongs to a Most Backward Class Community (MBC) but masqueraded and has filed a nomination, as if the fifth respondent belongs to the “Kurumans” Community which is a notified “Scheduled Tribe” community under the Constitution of India. 4. It is submitted that despite bringing it to the knowledge of the fourth respondent that the fifth respondent does not belong to the “Kurumans” Community and that he belongs to a Most Backward Class Community (MBC), the nomination was accepted and the fifth respondent was also allowed to participate in the election and thereby, declaring the fifth respondent as an elected candidate.

5. It is submitted that a person who does not have requisite community certificate to prove that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe Community viz., “Kurumans”, ought not to have been allowed to contest in the election. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though there is an alternate remedy under Section 258 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 is barred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not an absolute in as much as the fourth respondent failed to properly exercise the jurisdiction by rejecting the nomination of the petitioner and the fifth respondent as he did not have requisite certificate to substantiate as a Scheduled Tribe Candidate.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil Vs. The Additional Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, (AIR 1995 SC 94) which was confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.Venkatachalam Vs. A.Swamickan, (AIR 1999 SC 1723).

8. Opposing the prayer, the learned counsel for the fifth respondent submits that there is no impediment under Rule 26 and 29 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Election Rules, 1995.

9. That apart, it is submitted that the petitioner has an alternate remedy before the concerned District Court by filing an election petition under Section 258 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994.

10. In this connection, the learned counsel for the fifth respondent has relied on the following decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ravi Yashwant Bhoir Vs. The District Collector, Raigad and Ors., (2012) 4 SCC 407.

11. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent has also relied on the decision of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.35123 of 2016 vide order dated 03.10.2016, wherein dealing with Rule 26(3) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat (Elections) Rules, 1995, it was held that candidates contesting in the election are required to furnish only a declaration in the nomination form specifying the particular caste or tribe to which they belong and that there is no compulsion on the part of the candidates to produce their community certificate. It is submitted that the Court directed the respondents to accept the nomination of the petitioner therein for contesting the post of Ward Member in Ward No.16, Pennagaram Town Panchayat, based on the declaration submitted by the petitioner.

12. It is therefore submitted that the Court was also held that the respondents are directed to accept the