Judgment :- AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. 1. The Writ Appeal is filed against the order of Shivaraj Patil. J., dated 10-10-1995 in W.P. No. 9796 of 1995, allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent. The respondents in the writ petition are the appellants herein. 2. The respondent filed the writ petition to quash the proceedings of the 1st appellant in R.Dis. No. 100224/94(JB) dated 19-7-1995 and consequently direct the 1st appellant to issue community certificate in favour of the respondent as belonging to Hindu Irular forthwith. 3. The case of the respondent is that he was born on 3-3-1976, that his father M. Narayana murthi was then an employee working in the Indira Gandhi Atomic Research Centre at Kalpakkam, that his mother Parimala is also working in the same department, that his natural parents belong to Hindu Thuluva community, which is declared as Backward class in the State of Tamil Nadu and that his natural father M. Narayanamurthi died during 1982 when he was only six years old, leaving behind the respondent and his mother. At the time of the death of his natural father, the respondent was studying in Kendriya Vidhyalaya School at Kalpakkam. After the death of his natural father, the respondents mother got married to his adoptive father M. Kuppuswami, who was also working in the said research centre. Their marriage was solemnized as per the Hindu Marriage Act on 19-6-1985. The same was also registered before the Sub Registrar, Thirukazhikundram. 4. According to the respondent, the day after the marriage of his mother with M. Kuppuswami, i.e., on 20-6-1985, his adoptive father M. Kuppuswami adopted the respondent as son with the consent of the respondents mother Parimala. Thereafter, in all the documents relating to his education, the respondent had given the name of his father as that of his adoptive father only. After the adoption, the respondents parents sent him away to study in a boarding school at Tuticorin by name Star English Medium School, in the year 1986. He studied 6th and 7th standard in the said school. In the Transfer Certificate issued by that school, the name of the respondents father is given as M. Kuppuswami. In the year 1986, the respondents mother gave birth to a daughter by name Mangai and in the year 1987, a son by name Ramamurthi. He studied 6th and 7th standard in the said school. In the Transfer Certificate issued by that school, the name of the respondents father is given as M. Kuppuswami. In the year 1986, the respondents mother gave birth to a daughter by name Mangai and in the year 1987, a son by name Ramamurthi. During the academic year 1988, the respondent got himself admitted in Ramakrishna Mission Vidhyalaya Boys Higher Secondary School at Chingleput in 8th Standard. In the application form as well as in the hostel application form, the respondent has given his fathers name as M. Kuppuswami. 5. At the time of completion of his S.S.L.C., the formalities of filling up the S.S.L.C. book were done. In that book, a declaration was to be made by the father of the pupil. At that time, the Headmaster of the school asked the respondent to produce his community certificate. The respondents adopted father M. Kuppuswami filed a sworn affidavit on 10-10-1990 before the Judicial Magistrate, Madurantakam. In that affidavit. M. Kuppuswami has clearly stated that his adopting the respondent has taken place earlier. On the strength of the affidavit, the Headmaster of the school made an entry in the S.S.L.C. book stating that the respondent belongs to Hindu Irular community, which is the community of the respondents adoptive father M. Kuppuswami. He passed his Higher Secondary Course Examination from the said school in the examination held during 1994. According to the respondent, in all his school records including the Transfer Certificate and the S.S.L.C. Book, his community has been shown only as Hindu Irular, which is included as a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Tamil Nadu. 6. Thereupon, the respondent wrote the Entrance Examination to the professional courses in order to get admission in Engineering College. He came out successful in that examination held during May, 1994 and he was allotted to the Regional Engineering College at Warrangal for doing his Civil Engineering Course. Since the rules required the community certificate for Scheduled Tribe Candidates issued by an authority not below the rank of a Revenue Divisional Officer, the respondent made an application for getting the community certificate on 12-1-1994. There was no response. Subsequently, the respondents father also made an application on 6-4-1994 to the Tahsildar of Chingleput, to issue a community certificate in his favour. For that also there was no response. There was no response. Subsequently, the respondents father also made an application on 6-4-1994 to the Tahsildar of Chingleput, to issue a community certificate in his favour. For that also there was no response. Thereafter, on the persistent reminders, an enquiry was made for the issuance of community certificate in favour of the respondent. The Tahsildar, Chingleput, by his letter dated 4-7-1994 recommended the issuance of a community certificate. The respondent was asked to get legal opinion from the Government Pleader with reference to his community status. Even after getting all these reports, the 1st appellant did not pass any order. In the meanwhile, the Assistant Collector of Chingleput conducted an enquiry and recorded the particulars. The respondent was not aware of the report submitted by the Assistant Collector. Chingleput, which was sent on 7-12-1994. The respondents father was summoned by the 1st appellant by letter dated 16-5-1995 asking him to appear on 29-5-1995 with reference to the grant of community certificate. The respondent by then got selected for admission to the first year Engineering Degree Course at the Coimbatore Institute of Technology. The respondent was asked to bring the community certificate for the purpose of admission. When the respondent and his father approached the 1st appellant, he did not pass any order and the community certificate was not issued, with the result, the admission given to the respondent also got lapsed. However, the 1st appellant passed an order on 19-17-1995 rejecting the request of the respondent for issuance of the community certificate. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent has filed the writ petition questioning the conduct of the 1st appellant in not issuing the community certificate. 7. The writ petition was resisted by the 1st appellant. According to the 1st appellant, the documents viz., the affidavit sworn before the Judicial Magistrate, Madurantakam, and the document registered before the Sub Registrar, Thirukalikundram, are intentionally prepared by M. Kuppuswami in order to avail the concessions extended to Scheduled Tribe Communities by the Government. 8. 7. The writ petition was resisted by the 1st appellant. According to the 1st appellant, the documents viz., the affidavit sworn before the Judicial Magistrate, Madurantakam, and the document registered before the Sub Registrar, Thirukalikundram, are intentionally prepared by M. Kuppuswami in order to avail the concessions extended to Scheduled Tribe Communities by the Government. 8. Before the learned single Judge it was argued by the learned counsel for the respondent herein that the receiving of pension of the respondents natural father did not nullify his adoption by M. Kuppuswami, that as per the provisions of the Hindu Adoption Act, whatever rights had accrued to the respondent earlier, he had carried with him on adoption, that on facts and in view of the evidence on record it is clear that as on the date of adoption of the respondent, M. Kuppuswami had neither a son nor a daughter, that they were born subsequently and that mere retention of the natural fathers first letter as the initial of the respondent does not destroy his status as the adopted son of M. Kuppuswami. 9. The argument of the learned counsel for the respondent was countered by the learned Addl. Govt. Pleader by arguing in support and justification of the order impugned in the writ petition. He contended that the 1st appellant having considered the materials on record, has drawn inferences against the adoption of the respondent by M. Kuppuswami. The 1st appellant has also held that the adoption was invalid. Thus, according to the learned Addl. Govt. Pleader, the order impugned in the writ petition was valid and can be sustained. 10. He contended that the 1st appellant having considered the materials on record, has drawn inferences against the adoption of the respondent by M. Kuppuswami. The 1st appellant has also held that the adoption was invalid. Thus, according to the learned Addl. Govt. Pleader, the order impugned in the writ petition was valid and can be sustained. 10. The learned Judge, after considering the rival submissions and also the reasons given in the impugned order of the 1st appellant, came to the conclusion that there is material to establish that the respondent was adopted by M. Kuppuswami as stated by him, that the respondent was sent by M. Kuppuswami to study in Star English Medium School, Tuticorin in the year 1985, that the respondent studied 6th and 7th Standard in the said school, that in the Transfer Certificate issued by that school, the name of the father of the respondent is shown as M. Kuppuswami, that during the academic year 1988, the respondent was admitted in Ramakrishna Mission Vidhyalaya Boys Higher Secondary School at Chingleput in 8th Standard and that there also in the application form as well as in the hostel application form, the fathers name of the respondent was given as M. Kuppuswami. The learned Judge has further held that it is only at the time of filling of the S.S.L.C. book, the Headmaster of the school asked the respondent to produce the details of adoption of the respondent and that his adopted father belongs to Hindu Irular Community. The learned Judge in paragraphs 18 and 19 considered the arguments of the respective counsel and having regard to the documents produced by the respondent and in the absence of contrary averments as to the marriage of M. Kuppuswami with Parimala, the date of adoption and the birth of a male and female children to M. Kuppuswami through Parimala after the date of adoption, held that there is nothing to affect the status of the respondent. The learned Judge has also held that there was no valid reason for the 1st appellant to disbelieve these documents. Further, according to the learned Judge, after enquiry, the Tahsildar of Chingleput by his letter dated 4-7-1994, had recommended the issue of Irular Community Certificate (ST) to the respondent. The learned Government Pleader has also given an opinion in favour of the respondent. Further, according to the learned Judge, after enquiry, the Tahsildar of Chingleput by his letter dated 4-7-1994, had recommended the issue of Irular Community Certificate (ST) to the respondent. The learned Government Pleader has also given an opinion in favour of the respondent. In view of what is stated above, the learned Judge quashed the impugned order, as, according to him, the same cannot be sustained. 11. The same argument is repeated before us in this Writ Appeal. We have gone through the documents filed, considered the arguments of the learned counsel on either side and also perused the order of the learned judge. We wholly concur with the view expressed by Shivaraj Patil, J., in the order impugned in this Writ Appeal. The learned Jude has given cogent and convincing reasons for arriving at such a conclusion that the respondent belongs to Hindu Irular Community (ST). We are also of the opinion that the impugned order of the 1st appellant and the reasons given thereon for rejecting the request of the respondent are not sound and unsustainable in law. The reasoning of the 1st appellant that the respondent is getting pension payable due to the death of his natural father and that he has not severed his relationship with the former parents, is erroneous and contrary to the provisions of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. The said Act clearly states that the rights accrued before adoption will continue without any change. The reasoning given by the 1st appellant that the documents filed in proof of adoption were not acceptable is illegal. In fact, the 1st appellant even after the recommendation made by the Tahsildar and also the legal opinion given by the Govt. Pleader, failed to note that the respondent was adopted even before the birth of his younger brother in the year 1987. The registered document as well as the sworn affidavit indicate that the adoption was made even before the birth of second son of the respondents father. We have perused the documents. In all the documents right from the date of marriage of the respondents mother with his adopted father, his name has been shown as the father and no other persons name is shown as the father of the respondent. We have perused the documents. In all the documents right from the date of marriage of the respondents mother with his adopted father, his name has been shown as the father and no other persons name is shown as the father of the respondent. It is also not out of place to mention here that due to the perverse order of the 1st appellant, the respondent had to forego his Engineering seat for the academic year 1994-1995. 12. For all the foregoing reasons, we are of the view that there are no merits in the Writ Appeal. The Writ Appeal fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. The 1st appellant shall issue a community certificate to the respondent stating that the respondent belongs to Hindu Irular Community (ST) within four weeks from to-day.