Kerala HC: Child's Affiliation to SC/ST Community Valid even with One Parent Belonging to Different Caste

The present case pertains to the determination of a child's affiliation to the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) community. The petitioner, a student, filed a petition seeking a declaration that she belongs to the 'Paniya' caste, a recognized Scheduled Tribe community as per the Second Schedule to the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. The petitioner's father belongs to the Orthodox Syrian Christian Community, while her mother hails from the Hindu Paniya community.

LEGAL ISSUE

The key issue before the court was whether a child can be considered as belonging to the SC/ST community, even if only one parent belongs to the same community, provided the child has suffered social, economic, and educational disabilities.

HIGH COURT'S OBSERVATIONS

Justice Viju Abraham, in his opinion, referred to the decision in Indira v. State of Kerala [AIR 2006 KER 1], which held that if one parent belongs to the SC/ST community, the child is entitled to the benefits of that community. However, the crucial aspect to be considered is whether the claimant has suffered social, economic, and educational disabilities and has been accepted by society as belonging to the community.

The Court further noted that the child can be considered as belonging to the Paniya community if society has accepted her as one among them and she lives in the same social tenet.

CASE PROCEEDINGS

The petitioner contended that she was raised according to tribal traditions and faced the disadvantages associated with the tribe. The petitioner's parents had an inter-caste love marriage, leading to a breakdown in relationships with the petitioner's paternal relatives. The petitioner provided evidence that she was born and brought up in the Paniya community and had received financial assistance and benefits earmarked for Scheduled Tribes.

However, the Kerala Institute for Research, Training, and Development Studies (KIRTADS) submitted a report stating that the petitioner did not belong to the Scheduled Tribe Paniya community, but rather belonged to the Orthodox Syrian Christian community.

The petitioner challenged the report of KIRTADS, arguing that caste disability does not disappear even if someone marries a person from a higher caste. The petitioner moved the present petition to challenge KIRTADS' stand.

KIRTADS submitted a counter affidavit, alleging that the petitioner had suppressed relevant facts and pointing out instances of the petitioner's inclination toward the Christian community.

COURT'S DECISION

The High Court concurred with the petitioner's contentions, emphasizing that if a child has suffered social, economic, and educational disabilities and society has accepted them as belonging to the SC/ST community, the child can be considered as part of that community, even if only one parent belongs to it. The Court set aside KIRTADS' report and directed a reconsideration of the matter, with an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard and a proper inquiry to be conducted.

The Court further allowed the petitioner to submit argument notes and relevant documents supporting her claim of belonging to the Paniya community.