Judgment : 1. The prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order of the second respondent dated 110. 2000 insofar as insisting the petitioner to produce the community certificate issued by the Revenue Divisional officer for registering her community in the employment exchange and further direct the respondent to register the community certificate dated 212. 1985 issued by the Tahsildar for employment purpose. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she belongs to Kettunayakan caste, which comes under the Scheduled Tribe community. The petitioners father married one Vijayalakshmi on 4. 1982 who belongs to Brahmin Iyengar, a forward community. The petitioner and the children born to her father and mother, are brought up under the customs and traditions of the petitioners father viz., Kettunayakan community. On 10. 1985, the petitioners father made an application to the first respondent for issuing an inter caste marriage certificate and also for issuing community certificate for the petitioner and her sister. In the said application, the first respondent ordered enquiry and after enquiry, the Tahsildar, Tirupur issued community certificate to the petitioner on 212. 1985 certifying that the petitioner belongs to Kettunayakan community. A copy of the community certificate issued on 212. 1985 by the Tahsildar, Tirupur is also enclosed in the typed set of papers. 3. The grievance of the petitioner now is that when the said community certificate issued by the competent authority is available, the second respondent is not justified in directing the petitioner to produce the community certificate issued by the Revenue Divisional officer to register her name in the employment exchange in the category of Hindu Kettunayakan community (S.T). 4. The issue as to whether a person, who obtained community certificate prior to 111. 1989 from the Tahsildar, can be directed to get further community certificate to be issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, was considered by the Supreme Court in the decision in R. Kandasamy v. Chief Engineer, Madras Port Trust (1997) Writ L.R. 806. It is held in the said judgment that community certificate to S.C./S.T. issued after 111. 1989 issued only by the Revenue Divisional Officer is valid end the certificates issued prior to 111. It is held in the said judgment that community certificate to S.C./S.T. issued after 111. 1989 issued only by the Revenue Divisional Officer is valid end the certificates issued prior to 111. 1989 by the Tahsildar are valid certificates and it is not proper on the part of the respondents to insist upon to produce fresh community certificate from the Revenue Divisional Officer, by those candidates, who got community certificate from the Tahsildar. The said judgment was followed by this Court in N. Rajeswari v. District Collector, Nellai Kattabomman District, Tirunelveli and Others (2000) 1 MLJ 267 and in various other decisions of this Court. 5. Following the said judgment of the Supreme Court as well as the judgment of this Court, the demand made by the second respondent to produce fresh community certificate issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer cannot be sustained. The second respondent is directed to register the name of the petitioner in the employment exchange as S.T. candidate on the basis of the community certificate already issued by the Tahsildar, Tirupur dated 212. 1985. 6. The writ petition is ordered on the above terms. No costs.