Judgment :- 1. The revision petitioners had applied for resumption of the property scheduled to their application under S.15 or in the alternative under S.17 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. During the pendency of this application, a new sub-section was added to S.18 of the Act by amending Act 35 of 1969. This new sub-section provided that no land in the possession of a tenant who is a member of a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe shall be resumed. Long after this amendment, the 2nd respondent who was contesting the application of the revision petitioners filed I. A. 240 of 1972 on 9-5-1972 for amendment of the written objection by including an additional contention that the respondents herein and their father are members of the Cheramar Community and that for this reason no part of the property scheduled to the application could in law be resumed by the revision petitioners herein. On the very date of this application, the Land Tribunal, without giving as opportunity to the revision petitioners herein to file their objection, closed the petition for amendment by saying that there is no provision in the Kerala Land Reforms (Tenancy) Rules to amend a written statement and that, therefore, the petition will be treated as an additional written statement. The Land Tribunal found in favour of the revision petitioners on all the issues except issue I which reads: 'Are the respondents members of schedule caste community.' This issue was found in favour of the respondents. Therefore the application for resumption was dismissed. 2. The matter was taken up in appeal before the court of the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms), Ernakulam in L.R.A.S.108 of 1975. Two contentions were raised before the Appellate Authority by the revision petitioners. One of these contentions was that on re-conversion to Hinduism, the re-convert does not get into any particular community unless the particular community accepts him as belonging to that particular community. According to the revision petitioners, there was no pleading, much less proof, that the respondents and their father have been recognised by the Cheramar Community as belonging to this community. The other contention was that even after the purported re-conversion to Hinduism the respondents and their father have been continuously behaving as belonging to the Christian Community. This contention was sought to be supported by several documents. The other contention was that even after the purported re-conversion to Hinduism the respondents and their father have been continuously behaving as belonging to the Christian Community. This contention was sought to be supported by several documents. However the Appellate Authority rejected this contention and consequently the appeal preferred by the revision petitioners. Therefore they have come to this court with the civil revision petition. 3. The first contention that has been raised is that there was no valid proof of the alleged reconversion of the respondents to Hinduism. Secondly it is urged that the courts below should have held that even assuming that there was re-conversion of the respondents and their father to Hinduism, it meant, without more, only that they had become Hindus and not that they belonged to any particular community amongst Hindus. It is the petitioners case that the respondents and their father in spite of their alleged reconversion to Hinduism had been continuously behaving as belonging to the Christian Community. The Appellate Authority erred in thinking that there was no acceptable evidence to connect Exts. P1 and P2 documents concerned with the respondents. 4. Before going into the questions raised we may first look into how the Appellate Authority had dealt with the matter. Exts. P1 and P2 referred to above earlier are extracts of the baptism registers alleged to be of the children of the respondents. The Appellate Authority has pointed out that they have not been properly proved and that the Tribunal has rightly held that there was no acceptable evidence to connect Exts. PI and P2 with the respondents. Ext. P3 is a sale deed by the father of the respondents was in the year 1120 and where the father had described himself as The Appellate Authority would point out that the document writer copied the description from the document of purchase of 1111 and at which point of time respondents' father was a Christian and therefore Ext. P3 cannot be taken to be an admission as such regarding the caste or community of the executant. The Appellate Authority referred to the copies of depositions given by two of the respondents Chacko Thomas and Chacko John on 12-7-1963 and 29-7-1961 whereat the top of the first page it is written Ext. P3 cannot be taken to be an admission as such regarding the caste or community of the executant. The Appellate Authority referred to the copies of depositions given by two of the respondents Chacko Thomas and Chacko John on 12-7-1963 and 29-7-1961 whereat the top of the first page it is written Ext. P5 is the certified copy of the affidavit by Chacko George filed in O.S. 308 of 1958 where he has described himself as With regard to the statements, the Appellate Authority points out that they do not form part of the evidence tendered and it is not persuaded to accept the contention that the respondents and their father never re-embraced Hinduism and that they have not been so recognised by the Cheramar community. The Appellate Authority points out that the revision petitioners themselves have taken lease admitting the father as belonging to Cheramar Community. Accepting the evidence adduced on behalf of the respondents in the matter and pointing out to the admissions in Exts. D1 and D2, the Appellate Authority said 'I do not think there is need for evidence that Cheramar Community has recognised the respondents as belonging to their Community. Both sides agree that 'Cheramar' is included as scheduled caste in the Government order.' In the result, the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal. 5. S.18 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act enumerates general conditions and restrictions applicable to resumption of leasehold land. Sub-section (4) of the said section states that no land in the possession of a tenant who is a member of a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe shall be resumed. Clause (4) of Art.15 of the Constitution states that the State has power to make special provision for scheduled caste. In exercise of this power the State can make reservation for members of the scheduled castes in particular cases without violating Art.15 or clause (2) of Art.29. Clause (24) of Art.366 gives to the expression scheduled caste a technical meaning. It is 'such castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within such castes, races or tribes as are deemed under Art.341 to be scheduled castes for the purposes of this Constitution.' The President in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under Art.341 of the Constitution has issued the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. Paras (2) and (3) of this Order which are relevant read as follows: '2. Paras (2) and (3) of this Order which are relevant read as follows: '2. Subject to the provisions of this Order, the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes or tribes specified in Parts 1 to X11I of the Schedule to this Order shall, in relation to the States to which these parts respectively relate, be deemed to be scheduled castes as far as regards members thereof resident in the localities specified in relation to them in these parts of that Schedule. 3. Notwithstanding anything contained in Para.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.' 6. The question whether when a person converts from Hinduism to Christianity he ceased to be a member of his caste, had come up for consideration in many cases. This matter also has been dealt with by the Supreme Court in some cases. In Ganpat v. Returning Officer AIR. 1975 SC. 420 it was said: 'for a person who has grown up in Indian society, it is very difficult to get out of the coils of the caste system' and, therefore, even conversion to another religion like Christianity, has in some cases no impact on the membership of the caste and the other members continue to regard the convert as still being a member of the caste. It is interesting to note that the Supreme Court pointed out in Ganpat's case that 'to this day one sees matrimonial advertisements which want a Vellala Christian bride or Nadar Christian bride' which shows that Vellala and Nadar castes comprise both Hindus and Christians. In Chatturbhuj Vithaldas Jasani v. Moreshwar Parashram AIR 1954 SC. 236 Justice Bose speaking on behalf of the Court in that case said that when a question arises whether conversion operates as a break away from the caste 'what we have to determine are the social and political consequences of such conversion and that must be decided in a common sense practical way rather than on theoretical and theocratic grounds. The learned judge further said: 'Looked at from the secular point of view there are three factors which have to be considered: (1) the reactions of the old body, (2) the intentions of the individual himself and (3) the rules of the new order. The learned judge further said: 'Looked at from the secular point of view there are three factors which have to be considered: (1) the reactions of the old body, (2) the intentions of the individual himself and (3) the rules of the new order. If the old order is tolerant of he new faith and sees no reason to out caste or ex-communicate the convert and the individual himself desires and intends to retain his old social political ties, the conversion is only nominal for all practical purposes and when we have to consider the legal and political rights of the old body, the views of the new faith hardly matter.' We find a slight different note being struck in S. Rajagopal v. C.M. Armugam AIR. 1969 SC. 101. There it was said that when a person embraces Christianity he should be deemed to have lost his membership in the case. The Christian religion does not recognise any caste classifications. All Christians are treated as equals and there is no distinction between one Christian and another of the type that is recognised between members of different castes belonging to Hindu religion. In fact, the Supreme Court pointed out, caste system prevails only amongst Hindus or possibly in some religions closely allied to the Hindu religion like Sikhism Christianity is prevalent not only in India, but almost all over the world and nowhere does Christianity recognise caste division. The tenets of Christianity militate against persons professing Christian faith being divided or discriminated on the basis of any such classification as the caste system. It must, therefore, be held that when a person gets converted to Christianity he would cease to belong to the caste to which he belonged. There they relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran AIR. 1952 Madras 474 where the court said: 'Christianity and Islam are religions prevalent not only in India but also in other countries in the world. There they relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran AIR. 1952 Madras 474 where the court said: 'Christianity and Islam are religions prevalent not only in India but also in other countries in the world. We know that in other countries these religions do not recognise a system of caste as an integral part of their creed or tenets.' The Madras High Court's attention was drawn to the fact that there were several cases in which a member of one the lower castes, who had been converted to Christianity, had continued not only to consider himself as still being a member of the caste who had not been converted. Dealing with this aspect, the Madras High Court said: 'This is somewhat analogous to cases in which even after conversion certain families and groups continue to be governed by the law by which they were governed before they became converts. But these are all cases of exception and the general rule is conversion operates as an expulsion from the caste; in other words, a convert ceases to have any caste'. 7. The question was discussed in great detail in C. M. Arumugam v. S. Rajagopal and others AIR 1976 SC. 939. There the case law on the point was reviewed exhaustively and the principle was well put quoting from Justice Krishnaswami Ayyangar's observation in Durgaprasada Rao v. Sudarasanswami AIR. 1940 Madras 513. 'In matters affecting the well being or composition of a caste, the caste itself is the supreme judge.' Justice Bhagwati quoted the following passage from the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Kothapalli Narasayya v. Jammana Jogi (1967) 30 Ele LR.199 A.P. 'While tendency to divide into sects and divisions to form new sects with their own religious and social observances is a characteristic feature of Hinduism It should be remembered that sects were formed not only on community of religion but also community of functions. Casteism which has taken deep roots in Hinduism for some reason or other may not therefore cease its existence even after conversion. May be that the religion or faith to which conversion takes place, on grounds of policy, or otherwise, does not take exception to this social order which does not interfere with its spiritual or theological aspect which is the main Object of the religion. May be that the religion or faith to which conversion takes place, on grounds of policy, or otherwise, does not take exception to this social order which does not interfere with its spiritual or theological aspect which is the main Object of the religion. That is why we find several members of lower castes converted to Christianity in Madras State still continue to be members of their castes Thus a conversion does not necessarily result in extinguishment of caste and notwithstanding conversion, a convert may enjoy the privileges social and political by virtue of his being a member of the community with its acceptance.' Summing up the position Justice Bhagwati said that it cannot therefore be laid down as an absolute rule uniformly applicable in all cases that whenever a member of a caste is, converted from Hinduism to Christianity, he looses his membership of the caste. It is true that ordinarily on conversion to Christianity, he would cease to be a member of the caste, but that is not an invariable rule. It would depend on the structure of the caste and its rules and regulations. There are castes, particularly in South India, where this consequence does not follow on conversion, since such castes comprise both Hindus and Christians. 8. The question in this case is whether on reconversion from. Christianity to Hinduism the respondents should be deemed to have become members of the Cheraman Community. The following observations in the well known treatise on'Hindu Law' by Ganapathi Iyer, a distinguished scholar and jurist, were quoted in the Supreme Court decision. it .............caste is a social combination the members of which are enlisted by birth and not by enrolment. People do not join castes or religious fraternities' a matter of choice (in one respect); they belong to them as a matter of necessity; they are born in their respective castes or sects. It cannot be said, however, that membership by caste is determined only by birth and not by anything else.' (emphasis supplied) Justice Chandavarkar observed in Nathu v. Keshwaji (1902) ILR. 26 Born. 174: 'It is within the power of a caste to admit into its fold men not born in it as it is within the power of a club to admit any one it likes as its member. 26 Born. 174: 'It is within the power of a caste to admit into its fold men not born in it as it is within the power of a club to admit any one it likes as its member. To hold that the membership of a caste is determined by birth is to hold that the caste cannot, if it likes, mix with another caste and form both into one caste. That would be striking at the very root of caste autonomy.' Similarly Muthusami's case (1910) ILR. 33 Mad. 342 is to the same effect. The Supreme Court would conclude thus: 'Since a caste is a social combination of persons governed by its rules and regulations, may, if its rules and regulations so provide, admit a new member just as it may expel an existing member. The rules and regulations of the caste may not have been formalised: they may not exist in black and white: they may consist only of practices and usages. If, according to the practices and usages of the caste, any particular ceremonies are required to be performed for re-admission to the caste a reconvert to Hinduism would have to perform those ceremonies if he seeks re-admission to the caste.' But with regard to the ceremonies the Supreme Court would refer to the decision of Justice Varadachariar in Gurusami Nadar v. Irluappa Konar AIR. 1934 Madras 630 where the learned judge observed that no particular ceremonies are prescribed for them by the Smriti writers nor have they got to perform any Homas, One has therefore only to look at the sense of the community. It is in this context that the observations of Justice Krishnaswami Ayyangar which had been referred to earlier becomes important. What he said was that in matters affecting the well being or composition of a caste, the caste itself is the supreme Judge. The Supreme Court then would point out that there is no reason either on principle or on authority which should compel us to disregard this view which has prevailed for almost a century and lay down a different rule on the subject. If a person who has embraced another religion can be reconverted to Hinduism. there is no rational principle why he should not be able to come back to his caste, if the other members of the caste are prepared to readmit him as a member. If a person who has embraced another religion can be reconverted to Hinduism. there is no rational principle why he should not be able to come back to his caste, if the other members of the caste are prepared to readmit him as a member. It stands to reason that he should be able to come back to the fold to which be once belonged, provided of course the community is willing to take him within the fold. It is the orthodox Hindu society still dominated to a large extent, particularly in rural areas, by medievalist outlook and status-oriented approach which attaches social and economic disabilities to a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste and that is why certain favoured treatment is given to him by the Constitution. Justice Bhagwati would add that once such a person ceases to be a Hindu and becomes a Christian, the social and economic disabilities arising because of Hindu religion cease and hence it is no longer necessary to give him protection and for this reason he is deemed not to belong to a Scheduled Caste. But when he is reconverted to Hinduism, the social and economic disabilities once again revive and become attached to him because these are disabilities inflicted by Hinduism, A Mahar or a Koli or a Mala would not be recognised as anything but a Mahar or a Koli or a Mala after reconversion to Hinduism and he would suffer from the same social and economic disabilities from which he suffered before he was converted to another religion. According to the learned judge, it is therefore obvious that the object and purpose of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 would be advanced rather than retarded by taking the view that on reconversion to Hinduism, a person can once again become a member of the Scheduled Caste to which he belonged prior to his conversion. 9. Sri C. M. Kuruvilla, the learned counsel for the petitioners has really argued in this case on the basis of the principle laid down by the Supreme Court. What he contended is that there should be evidence in the case to show that the Cheramar Community had accepted the respondents and their father on reconversion as members of the community. Though it is no doubt true as the learned counsel pointed out that the recitals in Exts. What he contended is that there should be evidence in the case to show that the Cheramar Community had accepted the respondents and their father on reconversion as members of the community. Though it is no doubt true as the learned counsel pointed out that the recitals in Exts. D1 and D2 are not reflective of the acceptance of the Cheramar Community as such, it may still be considered as a good evidence that the community had accepted these persons into their fold because the respondents who are Christians themselves consider them as members of the Hindu Cheramar Community. If the Cheramar Community had not accepted them as members of the Community, it is unlikely that the Christians would call them or treat them as members of that community. The father of the respondents had taken the property on lease after executing the original of Ext. D2 registered lease deed dated 12-7-1973 in favour of the petitioners. There the executant had described himself as In the suit which was filed for arrears of rent by the appellants against Govindan he his described as Ext. D1 is a certified copy of the plaint in that suit. Govindan had re-embraced Hinduism long before Exts. D1 and D2. In the School Admission Register respondents 1 and 2 are described as Cheramar Christian Hindu. In one case against the column caste or religion it is put Hindu-Pulaya. It can be reasonably concluded that all had accepted that the respondents are members of the Cheramar Community after their reconversion to Hinduism and that will be indicative of the acceptance of the community itself of that position. There is no necessity for remanding the case for the purpose of getting further evidence on that. 10. One contention was raised by the respondents that the petition could be disposed of on the short ground that as resumption of any portion of the land from the respondents, they will be holding less than 50 cents and hence by the statutory inhibition, no resumption could be allowed. This is not a question which has been raised as such before the courts below and I do not therefore think I should entertain that plea in revision. This civil revision petition is therefore dismissed. However I make no order as to costs. Dismissed.