ORDER M.R. Hariharan Nair, J. 1. The revision petitioner was declared elected from Constituency No. 8 of Pallipad Grama Panchayat in the election held in the year 1995. This was challenged by the respondent herein through O. P.(Election) No.l of 1995 in the Munsiff's Court, Harippad. The election was set aside on the ground that the revision petitioner failed to substantiate that he was actually a Hindu Pulaya entitled to contest in the particular reserved constituency. Appeal Petition No. 36 of 1996 filed by him before the District Court, Alappuzha did not succeed and that is how the revision petitioner has approached this court. 2. According to the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the evidence adduced in the case has been mis appreciated by the two courts below and the burden of proof also has been wrongly cast. The case law applied is also not correct. 3. In the course of this revision C. M. P. 5730 of 1999 was filed for causing production of the extract of the tabulation register of S.S.L.C. Examination issued by the Secretary, Board of Public Examinations, Kerala in order to substantiate the fact that the petitioner is a Hindu Pulaya. The said petition was filed in the wake of the petitioner's contention that his original S.S.L.C. Book has been lost. As per the order dated 18-12-1999 the petition was allowed in part and summons was issued to the aforesaid Secretary to produce copy of the S.S.L.C. Book of the petitioner and this has also been produced subsequently. 4. According to the learned counsel for the respondent herein, there is ample evidence to show that the petitioner was actually a Christian by birth and had followed Christianity throughout. He falsely declared that he was a Hindu Pulaya, and hence it is contended that the decision of the two courts below does not warrant any modification. 5. Since the two courts below have concurrently found that the revision petitioner was followed Christianity and was not a Hindu Pulaya, this court will be justified in coming to a contrary decision only for very strong reasons. However, I am of the view that such circumstances and justification exist in the present case. 6. 5. Since the two courts below have concurrently found that the revision petitioner was followed Christianity and was not a Hindu Pulaya, this court will be justified in coming to a contrary decision only for very strong reasons. However, I am of the view that such circumstances and justification exist in the present case. 6. A perusal of the order of the learned Munsiff shows that the finding that the petitioner was professing the Christian faith was arrived at on the basis of the decision in Leelamma v. Dilip Kumar ( 1992 (1) KLT 651 ) and Sujatha v. Jose Augustine ( 1994 (2) KLT 4 ). Actually, the said decisions have been overruled in George Sebastian v. Molly Joseph ( 1994 (2) KLT 387 FB). The very fact that the decision of the two courts below was arrived at on the basis of an overruled decision itself is sufficient to have a fresh look into the whole matter. 7. The two courts below have cast the burden of proof with regard to religion and caste, on the revision petitioner based on the decision in Director of Tribunal Welfare, Govt. of A.P. v. Laveti Giri ( AIR 1995 SC 1506 ). Here again, there is a later decision of the Supreme Court in Narender Singh v. Mala Ram ( 1999 (8) SCC 198 ) which lays down that in election matters, it is the person who challenges the result of the election who has to prove his caste and that will include, in a case of the present nature, the religion of the successful candidate as well. Here is a case where the petitioner had produced his school records which dates back to 1963 wherein his religion was recorded as Hindu Pulaya. Both the courts have frowned upon the failure of the revision petitioner to produce his S.S.L.C. Book as a very suspicious circumstance to show that his contention with regard to religion is false. As already mentioned, based on the summons issued from this court, custodian of the records namely; Secretary, Board of Public Examinations, Kerala has produced the duplicate of the S.S.L.C. Book maintained in his office. A perusal of the same shows that the religion and caste of the petitioner as entered in the S.S.L.C. Book are Hindu and Pulaya (SC) respectively. As already mentioned, based on the summons issued from this court, custodian of the records namely; Secretary, Board of Public Examinations, Kerala has produced the duplicate of the S.S.L.C. Book maintained in his office. A perusal of the same shows that the religion and caste of the petitioner as entered in the S.S.L.C. Book are Hindu and Pulaya (SC) respectively. Thus, there is clinching documentary evidence to show that in the school records and in the SSLC Book the petitioner's religion and caste are recorded as Hindu Pulaya right from 1963 until 1969 when he left the school after appearing for the S.S.L.C. examination. In such a case, the court will be justified in finding that the said entries are incorrect only on production of clinching evidence to show that subsequent to 1969, the petitioner underwent baptism or that he changed over to Christianity. There is absolutely no evidence to show this. The burden in this regard lies on the present first respondent who challenges the declaration of the result of the election. If there is no clinching evidence to show that there was actually a change over to Christianity, the court has hence to accept the version of the petitioner that he is a Hindu Pulaya as recorded in the educational records including the S.S.L.C. Book. 8. There is evidence to show that the name of the petitioner's father was Mathai and that he was a Christian. There is also evidence to the effect that the petitioner's mother is a Hindu. Bindu v. State of Kerala & Ors. ( 2000 (1) KLJ 97 ) is authority for the proposition that when the father and mother were following different religions and where the mother belongs to a Scheduled Caste, the progeny will also be taken as members of the Scheduled Caste and that the entry in the S.S.L.C. Book with regard to the candidate's Caste is entitled to much credit. Of course that was not a case of election; but then a man's caste cannot be different for different purposes unless the law specifically prescribes guidelines which compel the court to find that for particular purpose caste has to be ascertained and declared based on such guidelines. 9. Of course that was not a case of election; but then a man's caste cannot be different for different purposes unless the law specifically prescribes guidelines which compel the court to find that for particular purpose caste has to be ascertained and declared based on such guidelines. 9. Narender Singh v. Mala Rama ( 1999 (8) SCC 198 ) is authority for the proposition that where two different views are possible with regard to the religion of a candidate, the view favourable to the returned candidate has to be taken and that the court should not interfere with the result in favour of the successful candidate. In the instant case, the Revenue Authorities had certified, even before the election, that the petitioner belongs to Hindu Pulaya Community and that he is a member of the Scheduled Caste. It is also very pertinent to note that the petitioner was elected from the very same constituency in the year 1981 also as a Scheduled Caste candidate and he was in office throughout the term without any challenge from any quarter with regard to his religion. 10. There is evidence to show that the petitioner's father was buried in a cemetery in a church. His name 'Mathai', as given in the nomination paper, also suggests that he was a Christian. Ext. X2(a) to the contrary produced before the Returning Officer was obtained based on a declaration that the certificate was intended for applying for a poultry loan. Ext. X4 proves this. In Exts. A2 to A4 voters' lists the petitioner's religion is recorded as Christian; but the responsibility for such a statement cannot be thrust upon the petitioner without anything to show that he had himself given the said details to the Enumeration Officers. That there was correction of name with regard to Ext. B2 marriage invitation relating to his sister also does not appear to be a significant aspect while deciding the question of religion of the petitioner. 11. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the findings of the two courts below suffer from material defects and this court would be justified in reversing the said decision. Based on school records including the S.S.L.C. Book the revision petitioner is found to be a 'Hindu Pulaya' entitled to contest from the reserved constituency concerned. The revision is accordingly allowed and the impugned orders are set aside. Based on school records including the S.S.L.C. Book the revision petitioner is found to be a 'Hindu Pulaya' entitled to contest from the reserved constituency concerned. The revision is accordingly allowed and the impugned orders are set aside. O. P.(Election) 1 of 1995 filed before the Munsiff's Court, Harippad is dismissed.