( 1 ) THIS Election Petition concerning the rejection of his nomination in the 1972 General Elections was filed on 24-4-1972 under Sec. 81 read with S. 100 (c) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the R. P. Act), by Sri S. Rajagopal against eleven persons as respondents. Respondents Nos. 2 to 11 were set ex-parte on 20-5-1972. The sole contestant that remained is the successful candidate 1st Respondent sri C. M. Armugam. For convenience, I shall refer to the petitioner as Rajagopal and 1st Respondent as Armugam. ( 2 ) THE above two persons were the only contestants in the 1967 general Elections from the same "68 KGF (Scheduled Caste) Assembly constituency" to elect a member to the Mysore Legislative Assembly. Rajagopal won and Armugam lost. Armugarn filed EP. No. 4 of 1967 in, this Court. My learned predecessor Mr. Justice Gopivaliabha lyengar (as he then was), by his order dt. 30-8-1967, declared the election of Rajagopal to fill the reserved seat as void. Rajagopal went up in appeal to the Supreme Court in CA. No. 1553 of 1967,, and the appeal was dismissed on 3-5-1968. The judgment is reported in AIR. 1969 SC. 101. ( 3 ) IN E. P. No. 4 of 1967, five issues were framed issues Nos. 2 and 4 were not pressed. Issue No. 5 relates only to the relief. The issues left for determination were Issues Nos. 1 and 3, which are as below :" (1) Does the petitioner prove that on the date of election the respondent no. 1 was an Indian Christian (Protestant) by conversion and not a member of the Scheduled Caste (Adi Dravida), professing Christian religion and therefore, not qualified to stand for election to the mysore Legislative Assembly as a candidate for the seat reserved for scheduled Castes from the KGF Constituency and his election should be declared void ujs. 100 (1) (a) of the Representation oi; the People Act, 1951? * * * * (3) Even if 'it is true that Respondent No. 1 got himself converted to christianity, does the respondent prove the facts and the circumstances set out in Para 11 of the written statement and do they constitute in fact and in law conversion back to Hindu religion as alleged; and is it enough in law to give him the benefit of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) order 1950?". Both these issues were decided against Rajagopal and in favour of Armugam. The Supreme Court had before it the consideration of Issues Nos. 1 and 3 only. ( 4 ) IN Paras 3, 4 and 5 of the judgment of the Supreme Court it is stated- 3. The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 was made by the President in exercise of his powers conferred Dy Clause (1) of art. 341 of the Constitution which is as follows: - ' 341 (1) The President may with respect to any Stats or Union territory, and where it is a State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes which shall for tht purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Castc-s in relation to that State or Union Territory, as the case may be". 4. The relevant provisions of this Order, with which we are concerned, are contained in paragraphs 2 and 3 and Item 1 (2) of Part viii of the Schedule to the Order, which are as follows: - 2. Subject to the provisions of this Order, the castes, races or tribes or parts of, or groups within the castes or tribes specified in Parts I to XIII of the Schedule to this Order shall, in relation to the Status to which those parts respectively relate, be deemed to be Scheduled castes so far as regards members thereof resident in the localities specified in relation to them in those Parts of that Schedule. 3. Notwithstanding anything contained in Paragraph 2, no person who professes a religion different from the Hindu or the Sikh religion shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. THE SCHEDULE part VIII-Mysore 1. Throughout the State except Coorg, Belgaum, Bijapur, Dhar- war, Kanara, South Kanara, Gulbarga, Raichur and Bidar Districts and Kollegal taluk of Mysore District: - 1. * * * * 2. THE SCHEDULE part VIII-Mysore 1. Throughout the State except Coorg, Belgaum, Bijapur, Dhar- war, Kanara, South Kanara, Gulbarga, Raichur and Bidar Districts and Kollegal taluk of Mysore District: - 1. * * * * 2. Adi Dravida 3 * * * * ( 5 ) THESE provisions made it quite clear that a person, who is an Adi Dravida, is qualified to be a candidate for the seat reserved for a member of the Scheduled Caste from this KGF Constituency in the State of Mysore, provided he satisfied the additional requirement of paragraph 3 of the Order of not professing a religion different from the Hindu or the Sikh religion at the time when his qualification to be a candidate has to be determined. In the present case, therefore, the validity of the candidature of the appellant depended on the question whether, in January and February, 1967, when he was nominated as a candidate for the reserved seat and was declared elected, he was or was not a member of Adi Dravida Caste and professing a religion different from the Hindu or the Sikh religion. The case of the respondent, as mentioned above, was that the appellant had become a Christian in 1949 and was still professing the Christian religion at the time of the elections in 1967. This plea was met by the appellant by pleading that he never became a convert to christianity and that, in any case even if it be held that he had once become a Christian in the year 1949, he was professing the Hindu religion at the relevant time' in tha year 1967. These are the pleas, that are reflected in Issues 1 and 3 reproduced above. " 5. Further on, in the judgment of the Supreme Court, we find the following :". . . . . Consequently, we affirm the finding of the High Court that the appellant was converted to Christianity in the year 1949, so that he lost the capacity of an Adi Dravida in which capacity alone he could have been held to be a member of a Schedule Caste under the constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order. 1950. . . . . Consequently, we affirm the finding of the High Court that the appellant was converted to Christianity in the year 1949, so that he lost the capacity of an Adi Dravida in which capacity alone he could have been held to be a member of a Schedule Caste under the constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order. 1950. * * * * * in our opinion, if this test is applied to the present case, it must be held that at least by the year 1967, when the present election in question took place, the appellant had started professing the Hindu religion. * * * * * in the present case, therefore, we agree with the finding of the High court that the appellant on conversion to Christianity, ceased to belong to the Adi Dravida caste and, consequently, the burden lay on the appellant to establish that, on his reverting to the Hindu religion by professing it again, he also became once again a member of the Adi dravida Hindu caste. " ( 6 ) AT the end of the judgment the Supreme Court has left one question open, observing:". . . . Ordinarily, the membership of a caste under the Hindu religion is acquired by birth. Whether the membership of a caste can be acquired by conversion to Hinduism or after re-conversion to hinduism is a question on which we have refrained from expressing our opinion, because, even on the assumption that it can be acquired, we have arrived at the conclusion that the appellant must fail in this appeal. " ( 7 ) ON the basis of the pleadings here issues were framed on 3-7-1972. They were recast as below on 22-8-1972:" (1) Does petitioner prove that on the date of Election, he was a member of the Hindu Adi Dravida Caste, a scheduled caste within the meaning of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order 1950 by birth and, alternatively, if it is held he was converted into Christianity, by reconversion and readmission into and acceptance by the adi Dravida Hindu Caste, and that he was therefore entitled to stand and contest as a candidate at the election to the Mysore Legislative assembly from 88, KGF (Scheduled Caste) Assembly Constituency notified by the Election Commission by Notification dt. 1-2-1972? (2) Does petitioner prove that the order of rejection dt. 1-2-1972? (2) Does petitioner prove that the order of rejection dt. 9-2-1972 by the Returning Officer of petitioner's nomination, an improper rejection within the meaning of S. 100 (1) (c) of the Representation of the people Act, 1950, rendering the election of first respondent from 68, kgf (Scheduled Caste) Assembly Constituency void? (3) Whether the petitioner having abandoned Hinduism and embraced Christianity in the year 1949 has lost the membership of the Adi Dravida Hindu Caste and incurred the disqualification under para, 3 of the Constitution (Schedule Castes) Order 1950, ? is this issue concluded against the petitioner by virtue of the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in C. A. No. 1553 of 1967? (4) To what relief is petitioner entitled? " ( 8 ) 25 witnesses (PW. 1 to PW. 25) were examined for Rajagopal. 24 witnesses (RW. 1 to RW. 24) were examined for Armugam. Exts. P1 to p. 158 (a) were marked for Rajagopal. Exts. R. i to R. 46 were marked for armugam. Exts. Cl to C3 were marked as documents for the Court. ( 9 ) IT is not disputed that Rajagopal was born an Adi Dravida Hindu. That he was converted to Christianity in the year 1949 and that at least by the year 1967 he had started professing the Hindu religion, are aspects which are concluded by the judgment of the Supreme Court. Whether his contention that he was accepted by the Adi Dravida Hindu fold and reverted to that fold, thus entitling him to contest from a Constituency reserved for members of the Scheduled Castes, is the question that remains for determination. ( 10 ) CL. (c) of S. 100 (1) of the R. P. Act is improper rejection of a nomination. Rajagopal's contention is on this ground. Since this is the crux of the matter, I shall refer, in extenso, to the material placed before the Returning Officer. The Nomination paper of Rajagopal was filed on 8-2-1972. Scrutiny of nomination was fixed for 9-2-1972. On that day, arrmugam filed his objections (Ex. P101) to the candidature of Rajagopal, as below:" (1) The respondent is an Indian Christian and his correct name is S. Victor Rajagopal, having embraced the Christian faith long ago. The Nomination paper of Rajagopal was filed on 8-2-1972. Scrutiny of nomination was fixed for 9-2-1972. On that day, arrmugam filed his objections (Ex. P101) to the candidature of Rajagopal, as below:" (1) The respondent is an Indian Christian and his correct name is S. Victor Rajagopal, having embraced the Christian faith long ago. (2) The Kolar Gold Fields Constituency is reserved for a member of the Schedule Caste and the respondent being an Indian Christian cannot file his nomination paper for elections for the Reserved seat of this Constituency having abandoned his Hindu Religion for christian religion. Thus be incurs the disqualification under paragraph 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. Even now he professes Christianity. (3) In the General Elections held to the Mysore Legislative assembly for the Reserved Seat of this Constituency (KGF) in february 1967, the respondent contested the elections and was returned to the Mysore Legislative Assembly. (4) The petitioner filed an Election Petition in Election Petition no. 4/1967 in the High Court oi Mysore at Bangalore which tried the petition and through its order dt. 30 th August 1967, the High Court of Mysoie alloted the petition and declared the election of the respondent to fill the Reserved Seat of the Kolar Gold Field Constituency to be void, ,and awarded costs of Rs. 1,500 to the petitioner. The order of the High Court of Mysore has been published in the Mysore gazette dt. 16th November 1967 at page 987. (5) Aggrieved by the Order of the High Couit of Mysore the respondent appealed to the Supreme Court of India, New Delhi, in civil Appeal No. 1553,1967 and his appeal was also dismissed with costs on 3rd May 1968. "the other recitars in the objections are not germane for our purpose. ( 11 ) ON the same date Rajagopal filed his Reply Statement (Ext. Pi02) before the Returning Officer, as follows :" (1) I am not a Christian as alleged by Sri C. M. Armugham, and that my name is not S. Victor Rajagopal and I have not embraced christianity. I was boin as a member of the Adi Dravida Caste amongst Hindus. My father late Sri Sahadevan and my mother Smt. Venkatamma, belong to the Hindu Adi Dravida Caste. The Adi dravida Caste is one of the Scheduled Castes notified under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order. I was boin as a member of the Adi Dravida Caste amongst Hindus. My father late Sri Sahadevan and my mother Smt. Venkatamma, belong to the Hindu Adi Dravida Caste. The Adi dravida Caste is one of the Scheduled Castes notified under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order. (2) I am and have always been professing the Hindu Religion and faith as member. My wife is a Hindu Adi Dravida lady whom i married in the year 1955. Against the entries of my children in the birth register of the Municipality the Caste of their mother is shown as Adi Dravida Hindu. My children are brought up as Hindus and have shown in School records as belonging to the Hindu Religion and of Adi Dravida Caste. In the 1962 General Election to the Mysore assembly Constituency I contested as a candidate from the Reserved scheduled Caste Constituency. (3) My election to the Assembly in the year 1967 ganeral election was challenged by Sri C. M. Armugam on the alleged ground that I allegedly embraced the Christian faith and has ceased to be a Adi Dravida Hindu. The proceedings of the election petition before the Honourable High Court of Mysoie which ended in the Court holding that I had ceased to be Adi Dravida Hindu, was taken to the honourable Supreme Court of India, in Civil Appeal No. 1553 of 1907 and the Supreme Court by its Order dt. 3-5-1968, made the following observations: ' (a) In our opinion, if this test is applied to the present case, it must be held that at least by the year 1967, when the present election in question took place, the appellant has started professing Hindu life. (b) It is true that his close relatives like his father and brother in-law, treated him as belonging to his Caste. But mere recognition by a few such relatives cannot be held to be equivalent to a recognition by the members of the Caste in general. . . consequently, it has to be held that appellant has failed to establish that he became a member of the Adi Dravida Hindu Caste after he started professing the hindu Religion. But mere recognition by a few such relatives cannot be held to be equivalent to a recognition by the members of the Caste in general. . . consequently, it has to be held that appellant has failed to establish that he became a member of the Adi Dravida Hindu Caste after he started professing the hindu Religion. ' (4) The main points on which the previous proceedings turned was that the material that all conversions into Christianity at Ponnai anaicut festival at which I was allegedly converrted into Christianity, had to be recorded in the Baptismal Register, maintained in the 'yehamur Church' and that at all events I was continued to be accepted by the Hnidu- Adi Dravida Caste as one of the members, was not placed before the Court. (5) I am producing a copy of a certificate from the Presbyter of church of South India, Yehamur Pastorate, dt. 29-1-1972, stating that there is no entry in the Baptism Register maintained in the Church of South India, Yehamur, regarding my alleged baptisrn. I am also producing the following documents to show that the members of the adi Dravida Community of KGF have always considered and accepted me as one of the members of Hindu Adi Dravida Community, kgf: - (a) The copy of the address of welcome presented to me both in tamil and in English by the members of the Adi Dravida Scheduled caste Conference held on 11-8-1s68 at Skating Rink, Nundydroog mines, KGF under the Prcsidenship of Sri Elumalai. (b) Copy of the resolution passed by the Conference touching my membership of the, Adi Dravida Scheduled Caste. (c) Six photographs taken at the KGF Adi Dravida Scheduled caste Conference. (d) Eight cuttings of different news-papers reporting the proceedings of the KGF Adi Dravida Scheduled Caste Conference. (6) Even assuming for the sake of argument that I have once been converted into Christianity which position I emphatically repudiate, the Honourable Supreme Court of India, has observed that- ' In our opinion if this test is applied to the present case it must be held that at least by the year 1967, when the present election took place, the appellant had started professing the Hindu life '. Further the Supreme Court said : 'even though the marriage was not celebrated according to the strict Hindu rights prevalent amongst Adi Dravidas, the marriage was not in Christian form and is alleged to have been in some reformed hindu manner. Thereafter, the appellant in 1961, took the step of having his service cards corrected so as to show him as an Adi Dravida hindu instead of Christian. This was followed by his candidature as a member of Adi Dravida Hindu Caste in the general elections in 1962, and, subsequently,, he gave out the caste of his Children as Adi dravida Hindus. These various steps taken by the appellant clearly amount to a public declaration of his professing the Hindu faith. The first step of marriage cannot, of course, by itself be held to be a sufficient public declaration that the appellant believed in Hindu Religion; but the subsequent correction of entries in service cards and his publicly standing as a candidate from the reserved Scheduled Caste constituency, representing himself as an Adi Dravida Hindu, taken together with the later act of showing his children as Adi Dravida hindu in the School records must be held to be a complete public declaration by the appellant that he was by this time professing hindu Religion. Finally, in the General Election of 1967 also, the appellant by contesting the seat reserved for a member o a Scheduled caste on the basis that he was an Adi Dravida Hindu, again purported to make a public declaration of his faith in Hinduism. In these circumstances, we hold that, at the relevant time in 1967, the appellant was professing Hindu Religion, so that paragraph 3 of the constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, did not apply to him. (7) It is settled Law that a Hindu converted into Christianity can be re-converted into Hinduism and that for such re-entry no formal ceremony or rituals are necessary. (8) Though the Honourable Supreme Court, has left this question open and has not expressed any opinion on it in one way or the other, it is clear from a number of decisions of various High Courts that on reconversion into Hinduism, a person can become the member of the same Caste in which he was born and to which he belonged before having been, converted into another religion. The basis of these decisions is that the members of the Caste may accept on re-conversion of a person as a member of the Case even though he may have lost such membership on conversion to another Religion (vide Kotapalli Narasiah v. Jammanna Jogi-E. P. 9 of 1967, No. (2) K. Narasimma Reddy v. V. G. Bhoopathi and Manicha Rao- E. P. No. 18 of 1967, No. (3) allum Krishniah v. Orapalle Venkatasubbiah-E. P. No. 10 of 1967, decided by the Andhra Pradesh High Court and K. Paramalai v. Alangaram-E. P. No. 9 of 1967 decided by the Honourable High court of Madras ). (9) Even assuming a prior conversion to Christianity, the rituals and welcoming acknowledgment and confirmation of my acceptance into the Adi Dravida Caste clearly establishes that the Hindu Adi dravida Community has accepted and always owned me as its member. I have celebrated the marriages of my brothers Sri S. Govinda- raj and Sri S. Manickarn, on 25-6-1969 at KGF and on 25-2-1970 near vellore in the traditional manner customary to Adi Dravida Hindus. I am producing a copy of the invitation sent out by me on the occasion. The members of the Adi Dravida Community both in my family circle and outside it, attended and participated in the function. I am a member of the Mysore State Scheduled Caste Cell of the Mysore pradesh Congress Committee (R), which clearly shows that I was accepted as Adi Dravida Hindu by the Adi Dravida Hindus. I have also been a part of Hindu Adi Dravida Community and fully and unequivocally accepted as a member of the same. (10) The decision of the Court in the earlier election petition would not bar me for the rest of my life from standing from the Adi dravida Caste for the reserved seat in view of the fact that the earlier proceedings may be res judicata only as between the same parties to the previous proceedings. The present election, the contest is amongst many other candidates amongst whom Sri C. M. Armugam, may happen to be one. The present election, the contest is amongst many other candidates amongst whom Sri C. M. Armugam, may happen to be one. The question whether I am a member of Adi Dravida Caste at the time of present election will hav to be decided on the facts now obtaining whether first of all, I was converted into Christianity and secondly whether even if it was so, I was accepted by the Adi Dravida Caste as a member thereof. For one thing the certificate from the Yehamur church will conclusively show that there was no such earlier conversion at the Ponnai Anaicut festival or elsewhere. At all events, there is abundant, overwhelming and legally conclusive material to show that in any event I was accepted as a member of the Hindu Adi dravida Caste. The Honourable Supreme Court itself had held that even in 1967, I was professing the Hindu life and what was found wanting there is evidence of my having been accepted by the Caste. That evidence is now available in abundance. On the judgment of the Supreme Court itself I would qualify with proof of my being a member of the Adi Dravida Hindu Caste throughout. The contention in paras 6, 7 and 8 of the objection petition of Sri c. M. Armugam, is irrelevant for the purposes of deciding that I belong ta Adi Dravida Hindu Caste. I, therefore, claim that I am a member of the Hindu Adi Dravida caste, a Scheduled Caste within the meaning of para 2 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and that I am entitled to be a candidate for the election at the KGF Scheduled Caste Assembly constituency and I further pray, that the petition of Sri C. M. Armumugham, objecting to my candidature to contest be rejected. " ( 12 ) ON that very date, the Returning Officer passed an order (Ext. P-103) reading as below : "shri S. Rajagopal's nomination papers : - objection by C. M. Armugam and his Counsel who is duly authorised by C. M. Armugam is stated in the petition filed before me today. The substance is that Shri S. Rajagopal is not a Scheduled caste. He is a Christian. P-103) reading as below : "shri S. Rajagopal's nomination papers : - objection by C. M. Armugam and his Counsel who is duly authorised by C. M. Armugam is stated in the petition filed before me today. The substance is that Shri S. Rajagopal is not a Scheduled caste. He is a Christian. This point has been elaborately dealt by the Mysore High Court and Supreme Court in their judgments in Election Petition No. 4 of 1967 decided on 30-8-1967 and Civil appeal No. 1553 of 1967 decided on 3rd May 1968 respectively. The judgments are read before me. Mr. Rajagopal has read some judgments of Andhra High Court and Tamilnadu High Court wherein it is stated that a scheduled caste who has converted himself to Christianity would get the benefits of Scheduled Caste after his reconversion to original Scheduled Caste. The Mysore High Court in their judgment referred supra has made it very clear, that a scheduled caste who has converted himself to Christianity would not get the benefits of the scheduled caste after his reconversion to the original scheduled caste. The relevant portion of the judgment of High Court of Mysore referred above reads as follows : the disability of respondent (Shri S. Rajagopal) to claim the benefit of the provisions of the scheduled castes order on his conversion to Christianity would not cease by his reversion'. The Supreme Couit in their judgment referred supra have refrained to give any finding on the issue. Hence we are all bound by the judgment of the High Court of Mysore, in the State of Mysore unless the judgment is reversed by the Supreme Court. I therefore order that Shri S. Rajagopal after his reconversion to scheduled caste cannot get the benefit of the Scheduled Caste Order. As this Constituency i. e. , 68 KGF (SC) Assembly Constituency is a reserved Constituency, i order that Shri S. Rajagopal is not qualified to stand as a candidate in this Constituency. Hence his nomination paper is rejected today this day of 9th February 1972. It is this order that is the subject-matter of the controversy. As this Constituency i. e. , 68 KGF (SC) Assembly Constituency is a reserved Constituency, i order that Shri S. Rajagopal is not qualified to stand as a candidate in this Constituency. Hence his nomination paper is rejected today this day of 9th February 1972. It is this order that is the subject-matter of the controversy. ( 13 ) DESPITE the voluminous evidence, at the commencement ol his arguments Sri M. N. Venkatachalaiah, petitioner's (Rajagopal's) learned advocate, represented, and 1 ieel rightly, that Issue No. 1 is the main, issue and, alter the judgment of the Supreme Court in Rajagopal v. Armugani, the all-embracing issue, that Issue No. 2 flows as a corollary, and that issue No. 3 does not survive for consideration. Sri S. Duraiswami ayyangar, appearing fairly late for the first respondent (Armugam) agreed with the above stand. Issue No. 4 concerns only the relief. ( 14 ) THE question, therefore, dwindles into a narrow compass, starting with premises which admit of no doubt. Rajagopal was born an Adi dravida. Hindu. The Supreme Court judgment is conclusive that Rajagopal was convicted into Christianity which is casteless, in the year 1949, so that he lost his capacity of an Adi Dravida Hindu, in which capacity alone he could have been held to be a member of the Scheduled Castes under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and that it must be held that at least by the year 1967 he had started proiessmg the Hindu religion. It is settled law that re-conversion to Hinduism does not require any formal ceremony or rituals or expiatory ceremonies, that a re-convert to Hinduism can revert to his oiiginal Hindu caste on acceptance by the members of that caste and that the quantum and degree of proof of acceptance depends on the facts arid circumstances of each case, according to the established customs prevalent in a particular locality amongst the caste there. It is not the case of Armugam or eny of his witnesses, nor was it even suggested in the cross-examination of Rajagopal ilajagepal or his witness that he was ex-communicated or ostracised by the Adi Dravida hindu Community. ( 15 ) THE Supreme Court accepted the evidence given on behalf of Rajagopal, that though he had been converted into Christianity in 1949, he did later on profess the Hindu region. ( 15 ) THE Supreme Court accepted the evidence given on behalf of Rajagopal, that though he had been converted into Christianity in 1949, he did later on profess the Hindu region. It listed seven circumstances as below : " (i) that ho married a Hindu Adi Dravida woman in the year 1955; (ii) that against the entries of children in birth registers of the municipality, the caste of the mother was shown as Adi Dravida Hindu; (111) that his children were brought up as Hindus; (v) that, when his children were admitted in school, they were shown as hindus in the school records; (v) that, in 1961, the appellaru made an application for correction of his service cards and had the entry of his religion as Christianity altered, so that he was subsequently shown as Adi Dravida Hindu in those cards; (vi) that, in 1962, in the general elections, he stood as a candidate from a Reserved Scheduled Caste Constituency; and (vii) that he again stood as a candidate in this general election of 1967 from the same Reserved Scheduled Caste Constituency. ' from the above Sri Venkatasubbiah asserts that the Supreme Court has met the petitioner half-way, and he has to cover the other half, and his endeavour would be to do so. With immense patience he has listed, as below, twelve events in this context which are post-January and February 1967, which were crucial months considered by this Court and the supreme Court : (1) Rajagopal celebrated the marriages of his younger brothers govindaraj (25-6-1969) and Manickam (25-2-1970) in the Adi Dravida manner, at which the majority of persons present were Adi Dravida hindus. This is borne out, besides the evidence of Rajagopal, by that of pw. 14 M. Ramadas, PW. 15 S. Govindan and PW. 18 M. Jayaraman; (ii) Rajagopal has been looked upon as a peace-maker among the Adi dravida Hindus of KGF. Besides Rajagopal, PW. 17 A. Jayarai, PW. 19 m. C. Perumal and PW. 22 M. A. Amalorpavam speak about this: (iii) Rajagopal was invited to participate in the foundation-stone laying ceremony on 24-4-1969 of the Kannabhiran Temple at Jambokolam, the devotees of which are Adi Dravida Hindus. PW. 16 K. Seethapathi supports Rajagopal in this regard; (iv) Rajagopal has been participating in the 'margazhi' Thiruppavai function at Kannabhiran Temple at TIT Line, Kennedy Block, KGF. PW. 16 K. Seethapathi supports Rajagopal in this regard; (iv) Rajagopal has been participating in the 'margazhi' Thiruppavai function at Kannabhiran Temple at TIT Line, Kennedy Block, KGF. , which essentially is maintained by the Adi Dravida Hindus there. On this aspect, PW. 16 K. Seethapathi corroborates Rajagopal. (v) We have Rajagopal's evidence that he has been presiding over the Adi-Krittikai Festival at the Mariamma Temple, I Post Office Block, marikuppam (KGF), and starting the procession of the Deity. He says that the devotees of that temple are mostly Adi Dravida Hindus. (vi) According to Rajagopal, there is a Scheduled Castes Cell in the organisation of the Ruling Congress, and he is an Executive Committee member of that Cell purely meant for Scheduled Castes. This gains some support from the testimony of RW. 22 IPD. Salappa. (vii) The funeral ceremonies and obsequies of Rajagopal's father sahadevan who died on 8-11-1971 were performed in the Adi Dravida hindu form. In this regard, Rajagopal's evidence is supported by that of pw. 14 Ramadas and PW. 18 M. Jayaraman. (viii) Rajagopal participated along with Armugam, in the first annual ceremonies of the late M. A. Vadivelu (a much respected Adi Dravida hindu leader in KGF), performed at Kannabhiran Temple, KGF. RW. 5 m. A. Ethiraj, brother of M. A. Vadivelu, speaks about this and describes his deceased brother as an educated, very methodical and upright man. (ix) Rajagopal's children have been treated as Adi Dravida Hindus even subsequent to 1967. On this, besides Rajagopal, we have the evidence of PW. 12 S. Imanuel Das, PW. 9 Pearujohn, and even Armugam himself, who issued the Certificate to Rajagopal's son R. Kumar on 17-6- 1972 that he is a Scheduled Caste Adi Dravida Hindu. (x) Rajagopal speaks about the general acceptance by the majority of the residents of the Mining area of KGF who are Adi Dravida Hindus, and that they have been treating him as one among them. He further says that he has participated in the All-India Scheduled Castes Conference at New Delhi held on the 30th and 31st of August 1968. On all the above aspects, the feeble cross-examination of Rajagopal's witnesses referred to above has not, in the least, shaken the testimony they have given in their examination-in-chief. He further says that he has participated in the All-India Scheduled Castes Conference at New Delhi held on the 30th and 31st of August 1968. On all the above aspects, the feeble cross-examination of Rajagopal's witnesses referred to above has not, in the least, shaken the testimony they have given in their examination-in-chief. That Rajagopal has Christian relations cannot be a hurdle against him, because it is obvious from the evidence that it is not uncommon for the Adi Dravida Hindus in KGF to have Christian relatives. " ( 16 ) SEVERAL of the witnesses on Rajagopal's side viz. , PW. 2 sambashivan, PW. 3 A. N. Swammath Pillay, PW. 4 Rev. Ashirvadam, pw. 15 S. Govindan, PW. 16 K. Seethapathi, PW. 17 A. Jayaraj, PW. 19 m. C. Perumal, PW. 20 Narayanaswamy and PW. 22 M. A. Amalorpavam, have spoken firmly that throughout they have regarded Rajagopal as an Adi Dravida Hindu belonging to that fold in KGF. This also finds corroboration in the testimony of Armugam's witnesses RW. 1 J. C. Adimoolam, RW. 5 M. A. Ethiraj, RW. 8 K. P. Armugam, RW. 9 S. M. Armugam, RW. 10 G. Subbarayan, RW. 14 N. C. Dwarakanath, RW. 16 v. Doraiswamy and RW. 21 K. T. Muniswamy, according to whom they learnt that Rajagopal had been converted to Christianity only from the order of this Court dt. 30-8-1967 and the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 3-5-1968. ( 17 ) THAT takes us to the magnum opus viz. , the Conference held at the Skating Rink, Nundydroog Mine KGF. , on 11-8-1968. ( 18 ) THE preponderance of evidence, not merely on Rajagopal's side, but even from many important witnesses on the side of Armugam, discloses that the conference was a Scheduled Castes Conference. I do not agree with Sri M. K. Nambyar, who appeared towards the very end to argue, that it was a cosmopolitan, heterogeneous, congress conference, nothing to do with the scheduled castes. The evidence discloses that the vast majority of the persons present was Adi Dravida Hindus. That others interested in them and having a leaning towards the Congress (R) also participated and that the tri-colour was too visible, does not detract from the view that essentially and in substance it was a Scheduled Castes conference with some persons of other castes being present, interested in their cause. That others interested in them and having a leaning towards the Congress (R) also participated and that the tri-colour was too visible, does not detract from the view that essentially and in substance it was a Scheduled Castes conference with some persons of other castes being present, interested in their cause. ( 19 ) WE have it from the evidence that long and meticulous preparations were made for the conference and it was widely publicised several days before it took place. ( 20 ) THE attendance at the Conference varies from about 200 to 300, according to many of Armugam's witnesses, and almost to about 1500 to 2000 according to Rajagopal's witnesses. From the Notes of Spot Inspection (Ex. C2), and the Report of the Commissioner accompanied by the sketch (both marked as Ex. C3), it is obvious that the Skating Rink can easily hold about a thousand persons, both sitting and standing. We can, therefore, safely take it that at least about a thousand persons, mostly drawn from the Scheduled Castes, with a sprinkling of members of the other communities interested in them, had gathered at the Conference. This finds support from Armugam's witness RW. 14 N. C. Dwarakanath. He says-". . . When I went to the Conference Hall at about 10-30 a. m. , i could find place to stand only at the rear, where I stood for some time and came back. "that the Skating Rink was over-crowded is also evident from the fact that, as disclosed by some of Armugam's witnesses themselves, several persons had gathered even outside. It is admitted that it was not a closed-door conference. ( 21 ) ONE contention of Sri M. K. Nambyar, learned Advocate for armugam, was that, all along, the petitioner suppressed the fact that he was a Christian and that fraud vitiates every act. But fraud has to be pleaded; and here it is not. That his caste people were not in the dark, is obvious from what Armugam himself has deposed. Speaking about the general Elections in 1962, in the examination-in-chief itself, he says-". . . At the time of the scrutiny of the nominations, I had raised an oral objection before the Returning Officer that petitioner Rajagopal was a Christian and was not entitled to contest lor the reserved seat. . . . . Speaking about the general Elections in 1962, in the examination-in-chief itself, he says-". . . At the time of the scrutiny of the nominations, I had raised an oral objection before the Returning Officer that petitioner Rajagopal was a Christian and was not entitled to contest lor the reserved seat. . . . . "what emerges from the overall position is, that to gain a temporary advantage, when Rajagopal was a minor, he became a Christian to be admitted into Voorhees High School and Voorhees High School Christian hostel, with all the attendant advantages, run by Christians in Vellore in Tamilnadu, that he was barely for 1 months there and then reverted as a Hindu, with his caste members wholly acknowledging him as one of their own, he having rejoined, them and taking a prominent role. ( 22 ) SRI Nambyar represented that there is no specific pleading in the petition alleging that Rajagopal was re-converted to Hinduism. As Sri venkatachalaiah stated, there is no express pleading, and what is not on the lines can be gathered by reading between them. That re-conversion is implied is apparent from the written statement of Armugam where, at the end of paragraph 20, it is alleged-". . . . So tar no provision is made for converts to Hinduism to be included in the original caste in the said order of the President (referring to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 ). At that rate it is submitted, that any Hindu after conversion may claim to be taken back to the scheduled caste fold after reconversion. " (The bracket is mine ). ( 23 ) TOWARDS the commencemet of the arguments, Sri S. Duraiswami ayyangar, appearing for Armugam, conceded, and I must say fairly, that the Conference did take place in the Skating Rink, KGF on 11-8-1968 and that the photos Exs. P3 series (Ex. P3 to P3 (k)) represent the incidents and scenes there. He also represented that a religious ceremony was performed at the Conference or. Rajagopal by PW. 5 Thiruvengadam swamiar. As spoken to by many of Rajagopal's witnesses, it was a 'shuddhi' or cleansing ceremony to remove the stigma of his being considered as a Christian pursuant to the judgments of this Court and the Supreme court and their publication in some newspapers and that it was not a ceremony to convert him, already a Hindu, into Hinduism. As spoken to by many of Rajagopal's witnesses, it was a 'shuddhi' or cleansing ceremony to remove the stigma of his being considered as a Christian pursuant to the judgments of this Court and the Supreme court and their publication in some newspapers and that it was not a ceremony to convert him, already a Hindu, into Hinduism. That he was professing Hinduism already is apparent from the Supreme Court judgment. Sri Nambyar made a subtle distinction, which to my mind is without a difference, that professing does not mean being re-converted or belonging to. In the Supreme Court judgment, the three expressions have been synonymously employed. For years together Rajagopal professed the hindu religion, was reconverted and belonged to it by public declarations and his mode of life, as instanced by the seven items listed in the judgment of the Supreme Court, and the twelve more added now, before his nomination was rejected by the Returning Officer on 9-2-1972 which, as contended by Sri Venkatachalaiah, was neither proper or justified. ( 24 ) AT a very belated stage it was suggested to some of Armugam's witnesses that the late M. A. Vadivelu, with a few others, walked out of the Conference when the English address (Ex. P56) was translated to the audience by PW. 22 M. A. Amalorpavam. This, evidently, is an after- thought put forward on behalf of Armugam. It is abundantly apparent that the late M. A. Vadivelu was closely associated with the conference from the v,ery time it was thought of, was an ardent sponsor of it and had made arrangements for its success since about three months prior to it by correspondence with the Mining Authorities as is evident from ex. P8 dt. 3-7-1968 and Ex. P9 dt. 29-7-1968. The former which is a handbill in Tamil, the English translation of which is Ex. P8 (a), sets out the objects of the Conference, one of which is mentioned as 'admission of rajagopal into our caste': the latter is on the letterheads 'kolar Gold Field adi. Dravida Scheduled Caste Conference', addressed to ' The Superintendent, kgmu. , Nundydroog Mine, Oorgam'. That the signatures in Exs. P8 and P29 are that of Vadivelu, is amply borne out by the testimony of pw. 19 M. C. Perumal, PW. 22 Amalorpavam and even RW. 1 J. C. Adimoolam, all of whom are familiar with his handwriting and signature. Dravida Scheduled Caste Conference', addressed to ' The Superintendent, kgmu. , Nundydroog Mine, Oorgam'. That the signatures in Exs. P8 and P29 are that of Vadivelu, is amply borne out by the testimony of pw. 19 M. C. Perumal, PW. 22 Amalorpavam and even RW. 1 J. C. Adimoolam, all of whom are familiar with his handwriting and signature. No suggestion has been made for Armugam in the deposition of Vadivelu's brother RW. 5 Ethiraj. that the signature is not that of his brother vadivelu. The alleged walk-out by Vadivelu with a few others at the conference when the English Address Ex. P56 was presented to Rajagopal was being translated into Tamil, cannot for a moment be believed. ( 25 ) WHAT is more, are three striking circumstances. According to rajagopal's witnesses who were present at the Conference, the English address Ex. P56 presented to Rajagopal was read by Vadivelu, and this finds confirmation from Armugam's witness RW. 2 P. M. Venkatesh. Secondly, the address Ex. P12 presented to PW. 13 Kakkan in Tamil a language most of those present understood, mentions towards the end that one purpose of the Conference was to admit Rajagopal who was born in the Adi Dravida Hindu Community, to Adi Dravida (Depressed Class hindu ). Again, it reiterates in the last para 'may we request you to encourage Thiru S. Rajagopal, so that he can continue to serve the people of KGF". It is not the case of Armugam that when this passage was read, before the translation of the English Address Ex. P56 to Rajagopal, there was even the mildest kind of protest. And to round it off, we have the testimony of Armugam's star witness RW. 1 J. C. Adimoolarh at para 47-"pw. 13 Kakkan left the Conference Hall at about 12-30 p. m. He left between 12 Noon and 12-30 p. m. PW. 23 Elu Malai also left with him. Vadivelu and his brother RW. 5 Ethiraj walked out with them. I was told that they had arranged food for P. W. 13 Kakkan and pw. 23 Elu Malai in the Guest House. " ( 26 ) ONE Resolution passed at the Conference is Ex. P13, on which tnere is no serious attack. It is in Tamil, signed by PW. 23 T. P. Elu Malai and PW. 13 P. Kakkan. Below the signatures is the date 11-8-1968. 23 Elu Malai in the Guest House. " ( 26 ) ONE Resolution passed at the Conference is Ex. P13, on which tnere is no serious attack. It is in Tamil, signed by PW. 23 T. P. Elu Malai and PW. 13 P. Kakkan. Below the signatures is the date 11-8-1968. The english translation of it (Ex. P. 13 (a)) reads as below:"this Conference resolves to set right the doubt arising in his ejection petition, recognise and also admit him to our Caste, Sri S. Rajagopal, who was born in our Caste brought up amidst us, also lived amongst us and who represented our Caste in Mysore Leigislature for the past 6-7 years serving efficiently and honestly. "there is no sjerious attack on this Resolution, though others, viz. , Exs. P47 to P55, have been assailed on the ground that there is tampering with the date. ( 27 ) THAT concludes the 12th and the most important aspect mentioned by Sri Venkatachalaiah. The Conferrence, to my mind, was 'vox populi Vox Dei'. With the seven instances expressed by the Supreme court, followed by the 12 others with the evidence now, there can be no room for doubt that after Rajagopal's professing and belonging to the genus of the Hindu community, he was accepted by the specie Adi Dravida hindus also. He was therefore wholly competent in the early part of 1972, having regained his original caste of Adi Dravida Hindu, by abundant proof that he belonged to the mainstream of that community, and was fully entitled to contest for a seat reserved for the Scheduled Castes. I wish the Returning Officer, who rejected the Nomination paper, had bestowed better thought on this aspect. On 9-2-1972 Armugam filed his objections to the nomination of Rajagopal; on the same day, Rajagopal filed his reply statement, and on that very day the Returning Officer passed his order, without considering the various points raised by Rajagopal. 'justice buriau Justice buriau', resulting in these avoidable and long- winded consequences. ( 28 ) TO assail the acceptance of Rajagopal to the Adi Dravida Hindu fold in KGF. , Armugam has referred to three aspects, which are rightly described by Sri Venkatachalaiah as a last-ditch manoeuvre. They are- (1) The institution of Nattamdars; (2) The existence of Adi Dravida jana Sabha. ( 28 ) TO assail the acceptance of Rajagopal to the Adi Dravida Hindu fold in KGF. , Armugam has referred to three aspects, which are rightly described by Sri Venkatachalaiah as a last-ditch manoeuvre. They are- (1) The institution of Nattamdars; (2) The existence of Adi Dravida jana Sabha. They are held out for Armugam to be the only arbiters for the acceptance of persons into the Adi Dravida Hindu fold in the KGF; (3) Exs. R19 and R20 which are put forward as resistance by many leading adi Dravida Hindus in KGF to the acceptance of Rajagopal back into the Adi Dravida Hindu fold. Having already inferred that the evidence on Armugam's side is paitisan and does not inspire confidence, these three aspects need not detain us long. ( 29 ) THE question of Nattamdars and Adi Dravida Jana Sabha are inter-related, and I shall consider them together. There is no whisper in the written statement of Armugam about the Nattamdars or Adi Dravida jana Sabha in KGF. No custom is specifically pleaded. The institution of Nattamdars was not put to any of Rajagopal's witnesses, except himself. A Nattom is alleged to be in every block in the mining area in kgf whose population consists of mostly Adi Dravida Hindus and according to Armugam's witnesses, the headman of each block is a Nat- tamdar. It is further the cose on Armugam's side that the Nattamdar in each block is the penultimate head, that the Adi Dravida Jana Sabha, composed almost wholly of Nattamdars, and the President of the Adi dravida Jana Sabha take the ultimate decision. They say that the President for quite some time is RW. 21 K. T. Muniswamy. ( 30 ) I shall set out here, fairly in ,extenso, the testimony of some of the witnesses on Armugam's side to demonstrate that there are as many versions as there are witnesses: 31. In view of the above wholly discrepant and unconvincing evidence, the institution of Nattamdars and the existence of the Adi Dravida jana Sabha, in KGF can be dismissed as belated inventions for the purposes of defence as contended for Rajagopal. Moreover, despite the alleged existence of documents, spoken to by some of the witnesses of Armugam, not a piece of paper has ben produced into Court. Moreover, despite the alleged existence of documents, spoken to by some of the witnesses of Armugam, not a piece of paper has ben produced into Court. The best evidence not being placed before Court, seriously militates against the institution of Nattamdars and the existence of the Adi Dravida Jana Sabha. The supreme Court in Saraswathi Ammal v. Jagadambal, AIR. 1953 SC. 201 has observed:". . . Oral evidence as to instances which can be proved by documentary evidence cannot safely be relied upon to establish custom, when no satisfactory explanation for withholding the best kind ol evidence is given. " ( 31 ) IT is laid down in Mohammad Baqar v. Naum-un-Nisa Bibi, AIR. 1956 SC. 546, that the burden of proving a custom in derogation of the general law being heavily on the party who sets it up, it is incumbent on him to prove it by clear and cogent evidence. There is no such proof, whatever, here. Armugam's plea that the Nattamdars and Adi Dravida Jana Sabha are the sole arbiters to accord acceptance to a re-converted Hindu into the adi Dravida Hindu fold, cannot certainly be countenanced. ( 32 ) IT With a very backward and prodommently illiterate labour-class community like the Adi Dravida Hindus in KGF. , who are mostly emigrants from Tamilnadu in search of employment, the existence of anciently established and well-regulated organised institutions, is far from probable. ( 33 ) IT Rajagopal was an employee of the Mysore Mine where RW. 12 p. M. Somanna was the Welfare and Labour Officer, and subsequently somanna has b,een the Chief Labour Officer in the Bharat Gold Mines in kgf which, as he describes, is a Public Sector Undertaking of the government of India and comprises all the Gold Mines and the allied establishments. With his vast experience as a Labour Officer, he was the most competent witness to speak to ihe, institution of the Nattamdars and the existence of the Adi Dravida Jana Sabha in KGF. On this aspect not even a single question was put, or even a hint thrown, in his examination-in-chief. ( 34 ) IT What is a natural and human realistic situation can be fairly safely gathered from two paragraphs in the deposition of Rajagopal, which run as below;"the majority of the population in KGF is Adi Dravida Hindus. Each mine management has been constituting a panchayat under its supervision. ( 34 ) IT What is a natural and human realistic situation can be fairly safely gathered from two paragraphs in the deposition of Rajagopal, which run as below;"the majority of the population in KGF is Adi Dravida Hindus. Each mine management has been constituting a panchayat under its supervision. In KGF there have been no caste panchayats meant exclusively for Adi Dravida Hindus, which are registered or recognised. There are some unrecognised panchayats. Each block has one such. I am unable to say if these panchayats maintain any registers of the members of that block. I belong to the unrecogised panchayat of Chellappa's block. They do not maintain any register. There is no record to show that I am a member of that panchayat, either now or earlier. * * * * * * there is no custom of a 'natam' (headman) conducting the panchayat for a block meant exclusively for the Adi Dravida Hindus. There is no election as such for electing panchayatdars. Whenever there is a, dispute some ten or so persons would gather and select one among them to be the panchayatdar. That man usually is the eldest person and a respectable man of that place. Like that there have been several persons in my block namely the Chelly's Block. For the last 5 or 6 years there are no such panchayats. They are defunct. This is the case regarding all the blocks. " ( 35 ) IT As the last straw Armugam has put in evidence Exs. R19 and r. 20, which are alleged to be in protest of the subject of Rajagopal's acceptance being decided by the Conference. I am inclined to agree with Sri Venkatachalaiah that Exs. R19 and R20 do not inspire the least confidence and appear to have been manufactured by Armugam subsequent to the Conference, for the purposes of this case. ( 36 ) BY and large, the Supreme Court has met Rajagopal half-way by holding that he was re-converted as a Hindu at least by the year 1967, satisfying Cl. (3) of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. It has also giyen seven instances to show his urge to revert as an Adi Dravida hindu, but held that these instances were not sufficient to conclude that he was accepted by the Adi Dravida Hindu fold. (3) of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. It has also giyen seven instances to show his urge to revert as an Adi Dravida hindu, but held that these instances were not sufficient to conclude that he was accepted by the Adi Dravida Hindu fold. Rajagopal has now covered the other half of the way, without a semblance of reasonable doubt. I have found that at the material time in early 1972 he further fulfilled the requirements of Cl. (2) of the above Order. The rejection of his nomination paper by the Returning Officer was, therefore, hasty, unwarranted and erroneous. ( 37 ) IT I am in full agreement with the submission of Sri Nambyar that the purity of elections has to be maintained. To my mind, how else can this be done, except by righting the wrong done to an individual seeking election and entitled to contest from a particular Constituency and who has been denied the legitimate opportunity to do so at the very initial stage, that of scrutiny of the nomination papers? ( 38 ) IT In the result, the finding on Issue No. 1 is that Rajagopal (petitioner) was a member of the Hindu Adi Dravida Caste, a scheduled caste within the meaning of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order 1950, by birth, that in 1949 he was converted to Christianity, and subsequently by re-conversion to Hinduism and re-admission into and acceptance by the Adi Dravida Hindu caste, he was entitled to stand and contest as a candidate at the election to the Mysore Legislative Assembly from 68, kgf (Scheduled Caste) Assembly Constiutency notified by the Election commission by Notification dt. 1-2-1972. Issue No. 2 is answered in the affirmative. Issue No. 3 does not survive for consideration. On the relief issue No. 4, I declare the election of Armugam (1st respondent) to be void. The petition is allowed with costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 2,000. 00. --- *** --- .