| GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE (C) DEPARTMENT Memo.No.3751/C/A2/2012-1,_ Date:06.01.2014 Backward Classes Welfare Department - Clarification | With regard to Caste of illegitimate child and inter-caste of husband and wife - Mother belongs to ‘Gangaputra’ of BC-A taste an father belongs to ‘Bukka’ caste of BC-D ~ The State has given to the parents of such children the option to. choose the caste of the father or of the mother of the children - Orders ~ Issued - reg. f \ Refi- 1) From Shri H.Arun Kumar, IAS., the Joint: Collector & | Chairman, District Level ‘Scrutiny Committee, Karimnagar Lr.No.C4/373/2005, dated. 17.02.2012 addressed to the Director of B.C. . Welfare, AP. |. Hyderabad !) From the then Director of Backward Classes Welfare, ‘_ .A.P., Hyderabad Lr.No.£/872/2012, dt- 14.08.2012. }) Secretary, Legal Affairs, Law Department U.O.Note No.5993/LSP/2013, dt:23.12.2013. ae The attention of the Commissioner, Backward Classes Welfare, %®., Hyderabad is invited to the references cited. The Commissioner, BC Welfare, A.P., Hyderabad Is informed that the clarification sought for by the Collector,; Karimnagar, as to whether the individual Shri B.Srinivas comes under ‘Gangaputhra’, BC A caste i.e. the caste of his mother, or *Bukka’ caste|which is included in BC ‘D’, as his father belongs to that caste. In this regard, it is observed that only test for deciding the religion, caste and sub-caste of any individual, as per the pronouncements of superior courts of India (Supreme Court of India/High Courts of States), Is that whether the individual is accepted as a Member of the caste/sub caste with which it is claimed. Admittedly, the mother of Sri B.Srinivas belongs to ‘Gangaputhra’ caste, which Is included in BC A and father belongs to ‘Bukke’ caste, which is included in 8C.'D’. There is no dispute about this. The dispute is what is the caste/sub caste of the children born to the aforesaid husband-wife. The legality of the marriage, legitimacy and illegitimacy of the children is not at all an issue in this case. /As per the report of Tahsildar, Jalapalli, Nalgonda District which reads as follows: “During the enquiry on perusal of records connected to!the matter, it Is reveals that Smt.Madasu Rajamma (belongs to Gangaputhra) had contact with Shri Bojannapalli Raghavulu (belonging to Bukka) gave birth to six children, their caste was recorded as Gangaputhra in school records, they also obtained caste certificates as if they belong to Gangaputhra caste, some of their children got employment under BC A category with Gangaputhra caste. and they never claimed the Bukka caste.”2. “Further, the record of enquiry reveals that the B.Stinivas has never availed the benefits by showing his caste as ‘Bukka’ and any of his family members availed the benefits under ‘Bukka’ caste. Further, according to the Secondary School Certificate Yo.0345365 issued by the Board of Secondary Education, A.P., Hyderabad, Shri 8.Srinivas has appeared the SSC exaininations during March, 1995 and his date of birth is 15.06.1976 and as such he was minor during 1991, 3. Record of enquiry reveals that the Society has’ accepted them as wife and husband, though they are not legally wedded, Raghavulu though he belongs to ‘Bukka’ community he never insisted or tried to enter the children caste as Bukka and allowed in the study certificates of his children ‘as Gangaputhra: Only thing which was happened was instead of Madasu, the surname of Raghavulu Bojannapalli was used as surname to all the children since they were born to Rajamma with the conjugalilife led with Raghavulu. 4. Hence, itis clear that the father of the appellant who himself was a School Teacher and intention of his mother was that thelr children should be treated as belong to Gangaputhra caste BC A. This is evident from the fact that all the school records of all the children was recorded as Gangaputhra. Though the parents may belongs to two sub castes of Backward Classes, the parents desired and opted as Gangaputhra caste. Record of enquiry also reveals that the society has accepted them as such. 5. In view of this, the children born to Madasu Rajamma and Bojannapalli Raghavulu are to be treated as Gangaputhra BC A. In this regard, it is to quote the decision of the Supreme Court of India in V.V.Giri Vs. D.S.Dora reported in AIR 1959 SC 1318 (1327) held “The caste-status of a person in the context would necessarily have to be determined in the light of the recognition received by him from the members of the caste into which he seeks in entry. There is no evidence on this point at all besides 'the evidence produced by the appellant merely shows some acts by respondent which no doubt were intended to assert @ high status; but unilateral acts of this character cannot be easily taken to prove that the claim for the higher status which the said acts purport to make is established. That is the view which the High Court has taken and in our opinion the High Court is absolutely right.” 6. __ In view of the above observations by Superior Colts, it can safely be concluded that the crucial test to determine is whether a child born out of such wedlock has been accepted by the Schedule caste community as a member of their community and has been brought up in that surroundings and in that community or not. The nexus between the child and theicommunity or class or caste is real test, irrespective of the fact whether’ the accommodating class or caste or commuhity is scheduled caste community or a caste Hindu Community.” !‘such. children are legitimate unless invalidity of marriage is due to grant of a degree of nullity by a 7 7as6, provision of Section Vinau Marriage Aee-i9S8, will spply.-Uner Section 6 (b) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 the natural guardian of a Hindu minor has been stated to be. (c) in case of an :illegitimate| boy or an illegitimate gir! the- mother and the after her the father. It can be derived from’ this that the illegitimate children are generally brought up by the mother and Pine ‘own surroundings. Therefore, If the mother belongs to the S.C. and brings up the child within a S.C. community, the child can be taken as aj member of the S.C. community. But in this case also the ‘major factor for consideration is whether the child has been accepted by ‘the S.C. community as a member of their community and he has been brought up asia such.” 8. Further) in the reference third cited, it.is observed that, as per the instructions from the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Lr.No.39/37/73-SCT-1 dated:04,03.1975, Circular Memo No.10956/CV.1/1997-2, SW (CV) Department dated: 16.02.1998 with respect to the! children of the inter-caste married couples as such, where either. parent belongs to SC,ST or BC and If the child can be declared as belonging to ‘the case of either parent they will be eligible for the concessions allowed to the persons of that case or sub caste. The illegitimate children are generally brought up by the mother and in her own surroundings. Therefore, if the mother belongs to SC and brings up the children within a SC Community, the child can be taken as'member of the SC Community. But the major factor for considerations'is whether the child has been accepted by the SC Community as a member of their Community and he has been brought up as such. 9. Further, with respect to status of off spring of a couplé where both the spouses are member of SC/ST or BC, but each belongs toa different sub-caste/sub-tribe, it is mentioned that in case of illegitimate boy or unmarried girl, the natural guardian will be the mother and after her, the father. 10. The High Court of Madras (FB) In M.Aarthi Vs., the State of Tamilnadu vide W.A.No.3221 of 2012 and batch held on 01.11.2002, inter alia, observed as follows:~ “The question which requires consideration is whether inter-caste marriages where one of the spouses belongs to SC/Tribe can be regarded as a category apart from the Scheduled Caste or the class to which the other spouse |belongs. The State has given to the parents of such children the option to choose the caste of the father or of the mot r the children. The additional provision for the children of the parents, one of whom belongs to the Scheduled Caste is in effect, an addition to the reservation alfeady made for the Scheduled caste and other classes and is traceable not to Article 15 (1), which permits reasonable classification, but the Article 15(4) which enable to state to make special provision, for the socially and educationally backward classes, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.”11, _ Further with respect to status of off spring of a couple where both the spouses are member of SC/ST or BC, but each belongs to a different sub caste/sub tribe, it is mentioned that in case of illegitimate boy or unmarried girl, the natural guardian will be the mother and after her, the father. pe-Parants of children have got every rlaht to adant elther the sub caste of mother or father, The will and wish of the |parents need be Fonoured and accepted. The complainant has rio! locus-standi to complain) in this case. The wish and will of Madast -Rajamma_and Bojannapalli Raghavulu is supreme and final ang binding!on the children. ‘The~Gangaputin a children as- Member of Gangaputhra sub caste. It is not for the complainant|to dictate what would be|the sub caste of the children born to the parents who belongs to Gangaputhra sub caste and Bukka sub caste and it is tor the parents to decide. | 12. The Commissioner, Backward Classes Welfare, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad is requested to take necessary action accordingly. y ' | ! i Dr.T-RADHA | PRINCIPA\. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT | To | _Ft€ Commissioner, Backward Classes Welfare, Andhra Praiesh, Hyderabad. | The VC & MD, APBCCFC Ltd., Hyderabad. ! ‘The Collector & District Magistrate, Karimnagar. | Copy to: \ All the District Collectors in the State, The Secretary, MJPAPBCWREIS, Hyderabad. : The Member Secretary, APCBC, Hyderabad. i All the Dy,Directors, BC Welfare Department in the State, | All the Executive Directors, APBCCFC Ltd.,. | ‘ ‘The Commissioner, I&PR (Publicity Cell), Secretariat | (with @ request to issue press note to both print & electronic | media) ( | PS to Hon’ble M(BCW). | PS to Pri Secretary to Government of India, BC Welfare'Department, All the SOs/ASOs in the BC Welfare Department, A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. | SF / SC. i | | //FORWARDED : BY ORDER// | \ 1C-BOcond ee OFFICER \ ito @ WO | Companion QE) vdk-cto-E]8 4a} ear Q-pL, Waderele — DEV ol-otu Comms Caled Co “ [onere)_ Wad des poCBers) IDeercea Breed? be ouureieuse at eee ext AY pr calls. hitva dal -