Judgment :- S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. This writ petition was preferred by the petitioner for a declaration that the Government Letter Ms. No.81, Adi Dravidar & Tribal Welfare Department, dated 19th Sept., 2000, is unconstitutional. 2. The impugned letter Ms. No.81, Adi Dravidar & Tribal Welfare Department, dated 19th Sept., 2000, relates to enjoyment of benefit of reservation meant for Scheduled Caste on conversion from Christianity to Hinduism. Therein giving reference to a Supreme Court decision dated 25th Jan., 1996, in SLP No.27571/95 (reported in (1996) 3 SCC 100 – S. Swvigaradoss – Vs – Zonal Manager, FCI), the Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar & Tribal Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai, clarified that as per the said judgment, a Christian by birth, on conversion to Hinduism, shall neither be eligible to get Scheduled Caste certificate nor be eligible to enjoy the benefits of reservation. 3. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the aforesaid clarification given by the Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar & Tribal Welfare Department, is against the Constitution Bench (5 Judges) decision of the Supreme Court in Guntur Medical College, Guntur & Ors. - Vs – Y.Mohan Rao reported in AIR 1976 SC 1904 . 4. For appreciation of the case, it is desirable to quote the relevant portion of the impugned letter dated 19th Sept., 2000, which reads as follows: - "Sir, Sub: Adi Dravidar Welfare – whether Adi Dravidar Christians on conversion to Hinduism are eligible to enjoy benefits of reservation means for Scs – Clarification issued. Ref: 1. Govt. Lr. No.83832/ADW2/83-18 Social Welfare Dept. Dated 9/7/84. 2. Lr. Ms. No.804, AD & TN Dept., dated 30.4.90 3. Lr. From the District Collector, Salem, No. R.O.C. 62756/94/D10 dated 6. 2000. The District Collector, Salem, has informed that the following clarification had been issued with regard to the issuance of Community Certificates to the Adi Dravidas who convert from Christianity to Hinduism :- 1) The conversion shall be notified in the Govt. Gazette. 2) An affidavit has to be obtained from the members of his Community that he has been accepted by them as one among their community members. The District Collector, Salem, has sought clarification as to whether a Adi Dravida Christian convert to Hinduism is eligible to enjoy the benefits of reservation? 2. The Government Considered the above subject. Children born to Christian parents belong to Christianity. The District Collector, Salem, has sought clarification as to whether a Adi Dravida Christian convert to Hinduism is eligible to enjoy the benefits of reservation? 2. The Government Considered the above subject. Children born to Christian parents belong to Christianity. The Honble Supreme Court had held that a Christian by birth, even on conversion to Hinduism subsequently shall not be eligible to enjoy the benefits of reservation in its order dt. 21. 96 in S.L.P. No.27571/95 (copy enclosed). Therefore it is clarified that as per the above judgment, a Christian by birth on conversion to Hinduism shall neither be eligible to get Scheduled Caste Certificate nor be eligible to enjoy the benefits of reservation. Yours faithfully, for Secretary to Government" 5. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no grievance against the first part of the letter, wherein it has been directed to notify the conversion in a Government Gazette and to obtain an affidavit from the members of his community that the person has been accepted by them as one amongst their community members; the grievance is against the last sub-paragraph of para-2, wherein it is clarified that first time convertee Christian to Hindu is not entitled to enjoy the benefit of reservation. 6. According to the petitioner, his parents were Hindu Adi Dravidar (Scheduled Caste), who had embraced Christianity in the year 1940. In the year 1973 they were reconverted and returned to Hindu fold along with their seven children, including the petitioner. All of them were accepted as Hindu Adi Dravidas by the community. The petitioner continued to profess Hinduism and has also been given a community certificate to the effect that he belongs to Scheduled Caste. His grievance is that, due to the clarification aforesaid, now he and those similarly situated wont get the benefit to which a member of Scheduled Caste is entitled. 7. The issue whether a Christian, on reconversion to Hinduism can again claim to be a member of his earlier community (Scheduled Caste), fell for consideration before the Supreme Court from time to time and the matter now stands settled. In this background, it is not necessary to decide the said issue while deciding the question of legality and propriety of the clarification given by the Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar & Tribal Welfare Department. 8. In the case of C.M. Arumugam – Vs S. Rajagopal & Ors. In this background, it is not necessary to decide the said issue while deciding the question of legality and propriety of the clarification given by the Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar & Tribal Welfare Department. 8. In the case of C.M. Arumugam – Vs S. Rajagopal & Ors. reported in (1976) 1 SCC 863 , while the Supreme court noticed Constitution Scheduled Castes Order, 1950, and the meaning of "Caste" therein, also decided the question whether on conversion a person ceased to be a member of his caste. That was a case of reconversion to Hinduism and a question was raised whether readmission of caste was permissible. In the said case, the Supreme Court held as follows: - "10. ............... A caste is more a social combination than a religious group. But since, as pointed out by Rajamannar, C.J., in G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran ethics provides the standard for social life and it is founded ultimately on religious beliefs and doctrines, religion is inevitably mixed up with social conduct and that is why caste has become an integral feature of Hindu society. But from that it does not necessarily follow as an invariable rule that whenever a person renounces Hinduism and embraces another religious faith, he automatically ceases to be a member of the caste in which he was born and to which he belonged prior to his conversion. It is no doubt true, and there we agree with the Madras High Court in G. Michael case that the general rule is that conversion operates as an expulsion from the caste, or, in other words, the convert ceases to have any caste, because caste is predominantly a feature of Hindu society and ordinarily a person who ceases to be a Hindu would not be regarded by the other members of the caste as belonging to their fold. But ultimately it must depend on the structure of the caste and its rules and regulations whether a person would cease to belong to the caste on his abjuring Hinduism. If the structure of the caste is such that its members must necessarily belong to Hindu religion, a member, who ceases to be a Hindu, would go out of the caste, because no non-Hindu can be in the caste according to its rules and regulations. If the structure of the caste is such that its members must necessarily belong to Hindu religion, a member, who ceases to be a Hindu, would go out of the caste, because no non-Hindu can be in the caste according to its rules and regulations. Where, on the other hand, having regard to its structure, as it has evolved over the years, a caste may consist not only of persons professing Hindu religion but also persons professing some other religion as well, conversion from Hinduism to that other religion may not involve loss of caste, because even persons professing such other religion can be members of the caste. This might happen where caste is based on economic or occupational characteristics and not on religious identity or the cohesion of the caste as a social group is so strong that conversion into another religion does not operate to snap the bond between the convert and the social group. This is indeed not an infrequent phenomenon in South India where, in some of the castes, even after conversion to Christianity, a person is regarded as continuing to belong to the caste. 11. ........... The caste system is indeed so deeply ingrained in the Indian mind that, as pointed out by this Court in Ganpat v. Returning Officer, “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. 9. Similar matter fell for consideration before a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court (5 Judges) in the case of Guntur Medical College, guntur & Ors. - Vs – Y.Mohan Rao reported in AIR 1976 SC 1904 . That was a case where the parents of the concerned person originally professed Hindu religion and belonged to Madiga Caste, a Scheduled Caste, in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Both the parents were converted to Christianity at some point of time, which was not clear, but after their conversion, the petitioner/respondent was born. The son, who was born to Christian parents, later on, converted as Hindu. Both the parents were converted to Christianity at some point of time, which was not clear, but after their conversion, the petitioner/respondent was born. The son, who was born to Christian parents, later on, converted as Hindu. The question arose whether on such conversion to Hinduism he could claim membership of the Scheduled Caste community to which his parents originally belonged. The Constitution Bench while endorsed the decision of the Court in the case of Arumugam (supra), held as follows: - "7. The reasoning by which this decision proceeded is equality applicable in a case where the parents of a person are converted from Hinduism to Christianity and he is born after their conversion and on his subsequently embracing Hinduism, the members of the caste to which the parents belonged prior to their conversion accept him as a member within the fold. It is for the members of the caste to decide whether or not to admit a person within the caste. Since the caste is a social combination of persons governed by its rules and regulations, it may, if its rules and regulations so provide, admit a new member just as it may expel an existing member. The only requirement for admission of a person as a member of the caste is the acceptance of the person by the other members of the caste, for, as pointed out by Krishnaswami Ayyangar, J., in Durgaprasada Rao v. Sudarsanaswami, AIR 1940 Mad. 513 , "in matters affecting the well being or composition of a caste, the caste itself is the supreme judge" (emphasis supplied). It will, therefore, be seen that on conversion to Hinduism, a person born of Christian converts would not become a member of the caste to which his parents belonged prior to their conversion to Christianity, automatically or as a matter of course, but he would become such member, if the other members of the caste accept him as a member and admit him within the fold." 10. Later on, similar question fell for consideration before the Supreme Court (2 Judges) in S. Swvigaradoss – Vs – Zonal Manager, FCI, reported in (1996) 3 SCC 100 . That was a case where the parents of the petitioner had got converted to Christianity from Adi Dravida (Scheduled Caste) prior to the birth of the petitioner. The petitioner was born to Christian parents. That was a case where the parents of the petitioner had got converted to Christianity from Adi Dravida (Scheduled Caste) prior to the birth of the petitioner. The petitioner was born to Christian parents. In the said case, the Supreme Court observed as follows: - "8. ............ The notification issued by the President and the Act of Parliament under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Act, 1976 and the Schedules appended thereto can be looked into for the purpose to find whether the castes, races or tribes are (sic or) parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes shall be Scheduled Castes for the purposes of the Constitution. Under the Amendment Act, 1976, again Parliament has included or excluded from schedules appended to the Constitution which are now conclusive. Schedule I relates to Scheduled Castes and Schedule II relates to Scheduled Tribes. Christian is not a Scheduled Caste under the notification issued by the President. In view of the admitted position that the petitioner was born of Christian parents and his parents also were converted prior to his birth and no longer remained to be Adi-Dravida, a Scheduled Caste for the purpose of Tirunelveli District in Tamil Nadu as notified by the President, petitioner cannot claim to be a Scheduled Caste. In the light of the constitutional scheme civil court has no jurisdiction under Section 9 of CPC to entertain the suit. The suit, therefore, is not maintainable. The High Court, therefore, was right in dismissing the suit as not maintainable and also not giving any declaration as sought for." 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned two Judges (Bench) of the Supreme Court, while decided the case in the case of S. Swvigaradoss (supra), it was not brought to the notice of their Lordships the decision of the Constitution Bench (5 Judges) rendered in the case of Guntur Medical College (supra). In this background, it has been observed that a person born to Christian parents and the parents having converted prior to the birth of the son, no longer remain as Adi Dravida (Scheduled Caste). 12. We are not inclined to accept such submission. First of all, judicial propriety do not allow this Court to make any observation with regard to the judgment rendered by the Supreme court, irrespective of number of Judges, who decide it. 12. We are not inclined to accept such submission. First of all, judicial propriety do not allow this Court to make any observation with regard to the judgment rendered by the Supreme court, irrespective of number of Judges, who decide it. The decision is binding on parties; the ratio and the law laid by Supreme Court is binding on all the Courts. In fact, we find that in different situations, taking into consideration the relevant facts, findings have been given by the Supreme Court. In the case of Guntur Medical College (supra), the Supreme Court, while observed that "there is no absolute rule applicable in all cases that whenever a member of a caste is converted from Hinduism to Christianity, he loses his membership of the caste". Having noticed the decision in the case of Arumugam (supra), the Constitution Bench observed that "ordinarily it is true that on conversion to Christianity, a person would cease to be a member of the caste to which he belongs, but that is not an invariable rule. It would depend on the structure of the caste and its rules and regulations". 13. The only question that arises for consideration in this case is whether the last subparagraph of paragraph-2 of the impugned letter dated 19th Sept., 2000, whereby clarification has been made, is proper or not. 14. Learned Advocate General, while assisting the Court, submitted that it would be prudent if most of the important judgments of the Supreme Court on the subject concerned is also brought to the notice of the officers concerned. We are also of the view that while giving instruction to the concerned officer, the Secretary should have also brought to their notice the important decisions rendered by the Supreme Court on the issue in question, such as the case of C.M.Arumugam –Vs– S. Rajagopal & Ors. reported in (1976) 1 SCC 863 , the Constitution Bench decision in Guntur Medical College, Guntur & Ors. - Vs – Y. Mohan Rao, reported in AIR 1976 SC 1904 apart from the decision in S. Swvigaradoss – Vs – Zonal Manager, FCI, reported in (1996) 3 SCC 100 . reported in (1976) 1 SCC 863 , the Constitution Bench decision in Guntur Medical College, Guntur & Ors. - Vs – Y. Mohan Rao, reported in AIR 1976 SC 1904 apart from the decision in S. Swvigaradoss – Vs – Zonal Manager, FCI, reported in (1996) 3 SCC 100 . It should be brought to their notice that the Supreme Court in the case of Guntur Medical College (supra) observed that "there is no absolute rule applicable in all cases that whenever a member of a caste is converted from Hinduism to Christianity, he loses his membership of the caste". Paragraph-7 of the said judgment, as quoted above, should also be brought to the notice of the authority for proper appreciation. Giving reference to such judgments, the Secretary, instead of forming any opinion without looking into the relevant facts of a claimant, should leave it open to the concerned authority to determine any individual case on its own merit. 15. In view of the discussions made above, we are of the view that the clarification given by the Secretary vide sub-paragraph of paragraph-2 of his letter dated 19th Sept., 2000, will confuse the officers. 16. We, accordingly, set aside the aforesaid clarification, as given in sub-paragraph to paragraph-2 of the letter dated 19th Sept., 2000, issued by the Secretary to Government, Adi Dravida & Tribal Welfare Department and remit the case to the authority concerned with direction to issue a fresh clarification giving reference to the other judgments rendered by the Supreme Court, as discussed above within a period of two months. The rest part of the order contained in Letter Ms. No.81 dated 19th Sept., 2000, issued by the Secretary to Government, Adi Dravida & Tribal Welfare Department is upheld. 18. The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.