whether by virtue of marriage, a person would become a member of the Scheduled Caste - No - 2015 A.P. (2014) MSK LAW REPORTS
whether by virtue of marriage, a person would become a member of the Scheduled Caste - No - 2015 A.P. (2014) MSK LAW REPORTS
It is the case of
the writ petitioner that though in her school record maintained by
Government DVHSS School, Vechoor, Kottayam District, Kerala
her caste was recorded as Roman Catholic, since she has been
continuously staying at Udimidi Village, and also married a
scheduled caste person and was also undergoing all the ordeals
attached to the scheduled caste community, the said community
has treated, considered and accepted her as one amongst them.
It is
further contended that on her marriage, she becomes part of the
family of her husband and accordingly becomes a member of the
same caste, to which her husband belongs. Since there was never
any dispute that her husband belongs to the Scheduled caste
community, the petitioner cannot be treated any differently. Strong
reliance was placed in support of the above plea upon the
judgment of Supreme Court rendered in Vassamma Paul v.
Cochin University and others =
whether by virtue of
marriage, a person would become a member of the Scheduled
Caste has fallen for consideration before the Supreme Court, on
more than once occasion. in Vassamma Paul v. Cochin University and others .
But
The Supreme Court in Rameshbhai has reviewed several earlier judgments and analysed the ratio of Valsamma Paulcase in that regard.
in an inter-caste marriage or a marriage between a tribal
and a non-tribal the woman must in all cases take her caste
from the husband, as a rule of Constitutional Law is a
proposition, the correctness of which is not free from doubt.
And in any case it is not the ratio of the Valsamma decision
and does not make a binding precedent.
It is also clear to us that taking it to the next logical step
and to hold that the off-spring of such a marriage would in all
cases get his/her caste from the father is bound to give rise to
serious problems. Take for instance the case of a tribal woman
getting married to a forward caste man and who is widowed or
is abandoned by the husband shortly after marriage. She goes
back to her people and the community carrying with her an
infant or may be a child still in the womb.
The child is born in
the community from where her mother came and to which she
went back and is brought up as the member of that
community suffering all the deprivations, humiliations,
disabilities and handicaps as a member of the community. Can
it still be said that the child would have the caste of his father
and, therefore, not entitled to any benefits, privileges or
protections sanctioned by the Constitution.
If the earlier judgment of the Supreme Court has been
understood in a particular manner, by a subsequent judgment of
the Supreme Court, and the earlier judgment was explained, that
is only the manner in which the earlier Judgment of the Supreme
Court is liable to be understood.
the writ petitioner that though in her school record maintained by
Government DVHSS School, Vechoor, Kottayam District, Kerala
her caste was recorded as Roman Catholic, since she has been
continuously staying at Udimidi Village, and also married a
scheduled caste person and was also undergoing all the ordeals
attached to the scheduled caste community, the said community
has treated, considered and accepted her as one amongst them.
It is
further contended that on her marriage, she becomes part of the
family of her husband and accordingly becomes a member of the
same caste, to which her husband belongs. Since there was never
any dispute that her husband belongs to the Scheduled caste
community, the petitioner cannot be treated any differently. Strong
reliance was placed in support of the above plea upon the
judgment of Supreme Court rendered in Vassamma Paul v.
Cochin University and others =
whether by virtue of
marriage, a person would become a member of the Scheduled
Caste has fallen for consideration before the Supreme Court, on
more than once occasion. in Vassamma Paul v. Cochin University and others .
But
The Supreme Court in Rameshbhai has reviewed several earlier judgments and analysed the ratio of Valsamma Paulcase in that regard.
in an inter-caste marriage or a marriage between a tribal
and a non-tribal the woman must in all cases take her caste
from the husband, as a rule of Constitutional Law is a
proposition, the correctness of which is not free from doubt.
And in any case it is not the ratio of the Valsamma decision
and does not make a binding precedent.
It is also clear to us that taking it to the next logical step
and to hold that the off-spring of such a marriage would in all
cases get his/her caste from the father is bound to give rise to
serious problems. Take for instance the case of a tribal woman
getting married to a forward caste man and who is widowed or
is abandoned by the husband shortly after marriage. She goes
back to her people and the community carrying with her an
infant or may be a child still in the womb.
The child is born in
the community from where her mother came and to which she
went back and is brought up as the member of that
community suffering all the deprivations, humiliations,
disabilities and handicaps as a member of the community. Can
it still be said that the child would have the caste of his father
and, therefore, not entitled to any benefits, privileges or
protections sanctioned by the Constitution.
If the earlier judgment of the Supreme Court has been
understood in a particular manner, by a subsequent judgment of
the Supreme Court, and the earlier judgment was explained, that
is only the manner in which the earlier Judgment of the Supreme
Court is liable to be understood.