The court reaffirms the validity of community certificates for issuing new certificates when prior valid documents exist.

1. Challenging the proceedings dated 10.5.2013 issued by the Respondent / Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur, refusing to grant Community Certificate as Konda Reddy (Scheduled Tribe) to the daughters of the petitioner, the present Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash the same and for a direction to the Respondent to issue the same.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to Konda Reddy community which is a Scheduled Tribe as per the Constitution Scheduled Tribes O.1950 and that his wife also has been described as Scheduled Tribe in her school records. According to the petitioner, his close relatives also have been issued with Community Certificates describing them as belonging to the Konda Reddis. The grievance of the petitioner is that when he made an application to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore, seeking for issuance of Community Certificates for his daughters, viz., L. Sharmila and L. Lavanya, the same was rejected by order dated 24.5.2011 stating that he has to approach the Revenue Divisional Officer of his native District from where his family hails. Challenging the said order, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition W.P. No. 16317 of 2011 and this Court, by order dated 02.01.2012, disposed of the same with liberty to him to approach the Revenue Divisional Officer, Salem. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur, with an application dated 27.02.2012 seeking for grant of Community Certificate to his daughters and the same was rejected vide order dated 10.5.2013, which is impugned in this Writ Petition.

3. The respondent Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur, has filed counter affidavit, inter alia, contending that the petitioner does not belong to Konda Reddy community besides stating that the documents submitted by him at the time of enquiry were all photostat copies and original of the same were not produced.

4. Heard Mr. V. Vijayshankar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. V. R. Kamalanathan, learned Additional Government Pleader representing the respondent and perused the records.

5. The issue involved in this case is whether Community Certificate can be issued to the children of the petitioner or not.

6. During the course of argument, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would plead that the Community Certificates have already been issued in favour of the petitioner as well as his wife being parents and when the same are valid and subsisting, his children are also entitled to get certificates on that basis. Expatiating his submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that once the certificates issued to the petitioner and his wife and other relatives hold good, they have to be accepted and the minor children cannot be denied the benefit of the communal status of Konda Reddy (ST) community.

7. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks in aid of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Bihar and Others v. Sumit Anand , 2005 (12) SCC 248 and C.V. Kalaivanan v. The Sub-Collector, Mettur Dam, Salem District , 2010 (3) CTC 673 .

8. Proceeding further, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also referred to the report of the Tahsildar dated 12.3.2011, which is filed as a document, and the same reads as follows:
(Editors Note: Vernacular Matter Omitted)

9. A mere reading of the said report of the Tahsildar would show that the Tahsildar, Coimbatore, had recommended for issuance of the Community Certificate to the petitioner. While so, it is seen that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore, had earlier rejected the