ORDER A.K. GANGULY, C.J. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed challenging an order dated 28.1.2008 passed by the second respondent herein deciding the validity of the community certificate produced by the petitioners. The petitioners are claiming that they belong to the Scheduled Caste Malayali Community. In the affidavit which has been filed in support of the writ petition, it is admitted that the father of the petitioners, Mr. Pasuvarajan, belongs to Jangam Caste and the same is classified as a Most Backward Class Community (see paragraph 2). It is also stated in the affidavit that the mother of the petitioners, Ms. Muthumari, belongs to the Hindu Malai Jathi Community, which is classified as a Scheduled Tribe Community. 2. In the impugned order which has been passed in this case, after conducting a detailed enquiry, the Revenue Divisional Officer, viz. the second respondent herein, has found that the petitioners have all along been following the customs of their father's community. Even in the school certificate, the petitioners' community is shown as Jangam Community. The enquiry conducted by the second respondent revealed that since the marriage between the petitioners' parents was an inter caste marriage, the petitioners had requested to be included in their mother's community. But on enquiry, it was found that the parents of the petitioners have stated that in then community, they used to give "Thithi" for the dead people and since the grandmother of the petitioners died one week before, the father of the petitioners gave "Thithi" for her. It appears, on enquiry, that the Malayalee Community is not in the habit of giving "Thithi" and they only do poojas, whereas the custom of the Jangam Community is to give "Thithi". Upon such enquiry and upon the admitted position that the caste of the petitioners' father is Jangam, the claim of the petitioners for being treated as belonging to Scheduled Tribe Community has been denied. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, assailing the impugned order, is relying on G.O. Ms. No.477, Social Welfare Department, dated 27.6.1975, which finds place at page 1 of the typed of papers. The said Government Order runs as follows:- "The Government have been extending certain concessions to the members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes from time to time. Learned counsel for the petitioners, assailing the impugned order, is relying on G.O. Ms. No.477, Social Welfare Department, dated 27.6.1975, which finds place at page 1 of the typed of papers. The said Government Order runs as follows:- "The Government have been extending certain concessions to the members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes from time to time. A question has arisen about the determination of the Community of the Child born of Inter-caste marriages. 2. The Government after carefully examining the question, direct that the Children born of inter-caste marriages, that is marriages i) between a person of a Scheduled Tribe and another of a Scheduled Caste or Backward Classes or Forward Class; ii) between a person of a Scheduled Caste and another of a Backward Classes or Forward Class; and iii) between a person of a Backward Classes and of Forward Class; shall be considered to belong to either the community of the father or the community of the mother according to the declaration of the parents regarding the way of life in which the children are brought up and that the declaration in respect of one child will apply to all children." 4. Now the question is, whether for the purpose of determination of caste, the authority should be guided by the customary Hindu law or will be guided by the Government Order as set out hereinabove. This question has been answered by a three judge bench of the Supreme Court in the case of AIR 2003 SC 4355 : (2003) 8 SCC 20S.B. SINHA, J. in a concurring judgment, made it very clear that determination of caste of a person is governed by customary laws. A person under the customary Hindu law would be inheriting his caste from his father. Following the said principles, this Court also finds that in the instant case, since the caste of the petitioners' father is Jangam, which is not a Scheduled Tribe, the petitioners cannot claim that they should be treated as belonging to the Scheduled Tribe Community. S.B SINHA, J., in the aforesaid judgment, has also observed that the caste of the father will be the determinative factor in the absence of any law. 5. In Punit Rai v. Dinesh Chaudhary (supra) also, reliance was placed on a circular. S.B SINHA, J., in the aforesaid judgment, has also observed that the caste of the father will be the determinative factor in the absence of any law. 5. In Punit Rai v. Dinesh Chaudhary (supra) also, reliance was placed on a circular. Considering the said circular, the Supreme Court held that since the said circular has not been issued by the State in exercise of its power under Article 162 of the Constitution, nor can the same be stated to be a decision taken by the Cabinet under Article 166(3) of the Constitution, the said circular, being an administrative instruction, is not a law within the meaning of Article 13 of the Constitution. In support of the said conclusion, the learned Judges of the Supreme Court relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of AIR 1959 SC 249 . In the instant case also, if we look at the aforesaid circular, it will be clear that the same was not issued either under Article 162 or in accordance with Article 166(3) of the Constitution. The same being a mere administrative circular cannot override the accepted customary law followed by the Hindu Community. 6. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition. The impugned order which has been passed by the second respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer, is upheld. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Writ petition dismissed.