The Tahsildar v. Sathi T.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/20TH SRAVANA, 1937 RP.No. 920 of 2013 () IN WP(C).21937/2012 ------------------------------------------- IN WP(C) 21937/2012 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 03-10-2012 REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN WRIT PETITION: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. THE TAHSILDAR RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHERUKOL, PIN: 689 650, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED SAVAD RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER & 3RD RESPONDENT IN WPC: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. SATHI T.
W/O.SANTHOSH K.R., KALATHIKKATTIL, CHERUKOL P.O. PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN: 689 650.
2. THE PRINCIPAL, ST.THOMAS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOZHENCHERRY PIN: 689 650, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
BY SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
--------------------------------------------------- Review Petition.No.920 of 2013 in W.P.(C).No.21937 of 2012 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2015
JUDGMENT
This review petition is filed by the respondents in the writ petition, stating that even though a submission was made before this Court that the caste certificate was issued on 27.09.2012, actually it was a communication to the writ petitioner stating that he is not eligible to get the case certificate on 'Hindu Paravar Community' and he belongs to 'Chakkamar Community'.
2. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that such a communication has been received and challenging the same, they filed W.P.(C).No.27696/2013 and is now pending. The review petition is therefore disposed of in the following manner. The judgment is modified to the extend that actually the communication issued to the petitioner is not one by way of issuance of caste certificate as sought for but it was only an information about the fact that he was
Review Petition.No.920 of 2013 in W.P.(C).No.21937 of 2012 -2not entitled for issuance of a caste certificate as sought for. The judgment is accordingly modified and the review petition is allowed.
Sd/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE vs