( 1 ) THESE appeals by special leave arise from the judgment dated 18/01/1995 of the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court in writ appeals Nos. 416 and 187 of 1992. The Division Bench, doubting the correctness of the judgment in Public Service Commission v. Dr. Kanjamma Alex, (1981) Ker LT 24 : (1981 Lab IC 1511), (subject matter of CA No. 1197/81) had referred the question to the Full Bench. Facts lie in a short compass and are stated as under:

( 2 ) TWO posts of Lecturers in Law Department of Cochin University were notified for recruitment, one of which was reserved for Latin Catholics (Backward Class-Fishermen ). The appellant, a Syrian Catholic (a forward class), having married a Latin Catholic, had applied for selection as a reserved candidate. The University selected her on that basis and accordingly appointed against the reserved post. Her appointment was questioned by one Rani George by filing a writ petition, viz. , O. P. No. 9450/91 praying for a direction to the University to appoint her in place of the appellant to the said post. The learned single Judge allowed the writ petition of Rani George and held that the appointment should be made strictly in accordance with Rules 14 to 17 of the Kerala State Subordinate Services Rules. When appeals were filed, the appellant cited the judgment of a single Judge in Dr. Kanjamma Alex v. Public Service Commission, (1980) Ker LT 18: (1980 Lab IC NOC 48), which later stood upheld in Public Service Commission v. Dr. Kanjamma Alex, (1981) Ker LT 24: (1981 Lab IC 1511 ). As stated earlier, doubting the correctness of the decision of the Division Bench in Dr. Kanjamma Alexs case, the reference to the Full Bench had come to be made.

( 3 ) THE Full Bench in the impugned judgment held that though the appellant was married according to the Canon Law, the appellant; being a Syrian Catholic by birth, by marriage with a Latin Catholic (Backward Class), is not a member of that class by marriage. The special provisions under Articles 15 (4) and 16 (4) of the Constitution intended for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens cannot be defeated by including candidates by alliance or by any other mode of joining the community. It would tantamount to making a mockery of the Constitutional exercise of identification of socially and educationally backward classes of citizen. Accordingly, the Full Bench overruled the decision of the Division Bench and of the single Judge referred to herein before. The appellant challenging the Division Bench Judgment in respect of Dr. Kanjamma Alex, (Civil Appeal No. 1197/81) is placed before us along with these appeals.

( 4 ) THE question is one of Constitutional importance to harmonize the personal law of the citizens and the constitutional goal, viz. to accord equal opportunity to the disadvantaged social segments, envisaged in Articles 16 (4) and 15 (4) of the Constitution. Shri T. L. V. Iyer, learned senior counsel for the appellant, contended that though the appellant is a Syrian Catholic (a forward class)by birth and had voluntarily married J. Yesudas, a Latin Catholic (Fishermen community), admittedly a backward class she had entered into the marital home of her husband in the year 1982 and was received and recognised by the community as a member of Latin Catholic. Due to her marriage, she has subjected herself and suffered all the environment disabilities to which her husband, J. Yesudas, was subjected and to which all other members of backward class in the region are subjected to. She cannot, therefore, be discriminated by denying equality given by Article 16 (4) of the Constitution. He elaborated the contention arguing that birth by itself is not a determinative factor for claiming protective discrimination given to the backward classes. Environment and social disabilities are also relevant factors to which the appellant had volunteered by subjecting herself to them and that, therefore, she is entitled to the same treatment