2021 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 79910
MADRAS HIGH COURT
, J
S. Paulraj – Appellant
Versus
Government of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 1230 of 2016
For the Appellant:[Counsel Name]| For the Respondent:[Government Advocate Name]
Inter-caste marriage certificate eligibility does not change with religious conversion; both spouses must be from different castes for eligibility.
Headnote:This judgement examines the issue of eligibility for inter-caste marriage certificates, referring to relevant orders, particularly G.O.Ms. No. 188. The petitioner, being of Backward Class by certificate and married to a Scheduled Caste individual, sought this certificate to avail public employment benefits. The court determined that both being from the same caste, the petitioner's conversion did not equate to inter-caste marriage, thus concluding the request was rightly rejected. The ultimate ruling of the court upheld that change of religion does not alter one's birth caste, leading to dismissal of the Writ Petition.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's qualifications and intent for inter-caste marriage certificate. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments supporting the issuance of the certificate. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. definition and implications of scheduled caste. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. clarification on inter-caste marriage types. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. discussion on caste changes and issuance of marriage certificates. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. court's rationale on eligibility for inter-caste marriage certificates. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. final ruling on dismissal of the petition. (Para 17) |
1. The petitioner possesses the educational qualification of Bachelor of Electrical & Electronics Engineering. The petitioner belongs to Christian Adi - Dravida. The 1st respondent has given a community certificate to the petitioner as Backward Class as per G.O.Ms.1564, Social Welfare Department dated 30.07.1985. The petitioner married one girl, namely, G. Amutha, who studied up to Master of Physical Education. She belongs to Hindu Arunthathiyar community. The marriage between the petitioner and the said Amutha was solemnized on 02.03.2009 at Thippi Reddy Thirumana Mandapam, Kolathur Mettur (Taluk), Salem District. The wife of the petitioner was given the Community Certificate as Scheduled Caste as per SI. No. 5 of SC / ST (Amendment) Act, 1976.
2. Under these circumstances, the petitioner relying on G.O.Ms. No. 188, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Personnel - P) Department dated 28.12.1976, has submitted an application for grant of inter - caste marriage certificate for the purpose of availing the benefits of priority in public employments.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the said G.O.Ms. No. 188 dated 28.12.1976 and contended that the Government Order says that Where one of the spouses belongs to SC / ST, then inter - caste marriage certificate has to be issued in favour of the petitioner. In the present case, the petitioner was issued with the community certificate as ËœBackward Caste and his wife was issued with the community certificate as ËœScheduled Caste and therefore, it is an inter - caste marriage and accordingly, the petitioner is entitled to get inter - caste marriage certificate for the purpose of availing the benefits including priority in public employment.
4. The learned Government Advocate contended that the Government has issued clarification that conversion of religion would not entail a person to get an inter - caste marriage certificate.
5. In this regard, the clarification was issued by the Government in letter No. 235, Social Welfare Department dated 21.07.1997. As per the said clarification, change of religion could not be a ground to grant inter - caste marriage certificate. Relying on the said clarification letter, the learned Government counsel reiterated that the case of the petitioner was rightly rejected. Even in the impugned order, it is stated that, as per the inquiry report received from the Revenue Inspector, Mettur, the petitioner S. Paulraj as well as his wife Smt. G. Amutha by birth belongs to Christian Adi - Dravidar and Hindu Arunthathiyar community, respectively. Therefore, the inter - caste marriage certificate cannot be granted.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Soosai v. Union of India, 1985 Supp SCC 590 : AIR 1986 SC 733, delivered a judgment on 30.09.1985 and made an observation that œThe expression Scheduled Caste is defined in clause 24 of Art.366 to mean such castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within such castes, races or tribes as are deemed under Art.341 to be Scheduled Castes for the purpose of this Constitution.
7. The Apex Court further observed that œNow it cannot be disputed that the Caste System is a feature of the Hindu Social structure. It is a social phenomenon peculiar to Hindu Society. The division of the Hindu social order by reference at one time to professional or vocational occupation was moulded into a structural hierarchy which over the centuries crystallized into a stratification wher