ORDER D.V. SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J.—The only point that has been urged in this writ petition, a matter arising under the provisions of the Karnataka (Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act. 1978 (for short ‘the Act’) and directed against the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner exercising his appellate power under Section 5A of the Act is that the original grantee-one Erappa in whose favour Government land in an extend of 32 guntas in Sy. No. 17 of Gangonda-nahalli Village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, had been granted with certain conditions is not a person belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and, therefore, the Deputy Commissioner has committed an error in interfering with the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner who had declined to act under Section 5 of the Act at the instance of the original grantee. 2. Grant of this extent of land on 7.11.1978 in favour of Erappa and the subject, land having been sold by the said grantee on 12.1.1995 to one Nagaraj who in turn having sold the same in favour of the present writ petitioner-Gowramma as per another sale transaction dated 15.5.1997 are not in dispute. Erappa himself had petitioned before the Assistant Commissioner claiming that he should be extended the benefit of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act by holding an inquiry under Section 5 of the Act and for resumption of the land and restore it to him. 3. The inquiry was held by the Assistant Commissioner, writ petitioner had been put on notice and was heard. 4. On behalf of the writ petitioner, in the proceedings under Section 5 of the Act before the Assistant Commissioner, specific contention was taken to the effect that the caste certificate that had been produced on behalf of the grantee to the effect that person belonged to Scheduled Caste was a forged document; that it was totally false and incorrect; that the caste certificate in respect of one Gangabhadraiah cannot be of any avail to the applicant-grantee as the said person is a third person and, therefore, the application should be rejected and other grounds are also urged. 5. 5. Ultimately, the Assistant Commissioner though discussed all these arguments both written and oral, filed on behalf of the applicant as well as by the respondents, recorded a finding to the effect that on the basis of the xerox copy of the caste certificate produced in respect of Gangabhadraiah. son of Erappa-grantee, it appeared that the grantee belonged to ‘nayaka’ community, but nevertheless, proceeded to reject the application holding that there was no merit in the application and, therefore, it is to be dismissed as per order dated 1.4.2008 (copy at Annexure H). 6. As against this order, the legal heir of the original grantee, namely. Smt. Puttasiddamma wife of Erappa. filed an appeal as by that time the applicant Erappa was no more and in the appeal under Section 5A of the Act, the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District, as per his order dated 19.4.2010 (copy at Annexure L) allowed the appeal, by setting aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner observing that the Assistant Commissioner had not bestowed proper attention to the legal position as well as the factual position and also noticing that the subject land had been acquired by the State for the benefit of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board for ‘BMIC Project’; that there was no question of resumption of the land from the possession of the purchaser, but recorded a finding that the grantee or his legal heirs are entitled to receive compensation in respect of the subject land. 7. It is questioning legality of this order at Annexure L and for quashing the same, the present writ petition by the last purchaser. 8. Appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner and as noticed in the earlier part of this order, Sri. 7. It is questioning legality of this order at Annexure L and for quashing the same, the present writ petition by the last purchaser. 8. Appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner and as noticed in the earlier part of this order, Sri. N. Devhadass, learned senior counsel would urge that the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner is not at all a satisfactory order; that the finding to the effect that the grantee was a person belonging to Scheduled Tribe community as recorded for the first time by the Deputy Commissioner is not a finding that can be accepted as a proper finding in law, more so when reliance placed to come to this conclusion was only on the basis of the caste certificate issued in favour of one Gangabhadraiaha person who was neither the grantee nor the relationship with the grantee indicated and more than that, the grantee Erappa being not a person who had belonged to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community at the time of the grant, i.e., in the year 1978 as even according to the observations made in the order, the ‘nayaka’ community to which the grantee belonged was identified as a Scheduled Tribe community in the Presidential Order by way of amendment of the year 1991 as per Notification No. 39 of 1991 dated 17.9.1991, and on the question as to whether such inclusion by a subsequent amendment to the Presidential Order can impute the tag of the granted person belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community by the retrospective operation of the Presidential Order is a question which is now seized before the Full Bench of this Court and, therefore, submits that this matter also can be referred to the Full Bench or in the alternative to keep this matter pending awaiting the decision by the Full Bench on such question. 9. Submission of Sri. 9. Submission of Sri. Omkumar, learned Additional Government Advocate with reference to the Presidential Order appended to the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950 and Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 as amended by Act No. 108 of 1976 with effect from 27.7.1977 and in Part VI of this Schedule relating to Karnanaka State at Item No. 38 which reads as under: “Naikda, Nayaka, Chollivala Nayaka, Kapadia Nayaka, Mota Nayaka, Nana Nayaka” is that the community ‘nayaka1 was a Scheduled Tribe community within the scope of the Presidential Order even with effect from 27.7.1977 whereas the subject grant being without dispute dated 7.11.1978, person belonged to Scheduled Tribe community and in this view of the matter, the applicability of the Act to the subject land and first sale being of the year 1995 subsequent to the Act coming into force and not preceded by prior permission of the State Government, all transactions right up to the transaction of the year 1995 under which the petitioner claims right, title and interest are all voided; that the action taken by the Deputy Commissioner being only for such purpose, there is no need or occasion to interfere with the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner as the purpose of Sections 4 and 5 of the Act is achieved by this order irrespective of the reasons given by the Deputy Commissioner and, therefore, submits that the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 10. Appearing on behalf of fifth respondent a person claiming under original grantee as legal heir, submission of Sri. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel is that in the present case, there was no dispute about the community of the grantee as it was not made an issue by the writ petitioner before the Assistant Commissioner but what was contended was only that the grantee’s caste or community as one belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe cannot be inferred by mere production of the caste certificate in the name of Gangabhadraiah and when the Deputy Commissioner points out that Gangabhadraiah is only son of the grantee-Erappa and explanation of Sri. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for the fifth respondent is that as the original grantee-Erappa did not have a caste certificate obtained in his name, but for the purpose of school admission of his son had obtained a caste certificate of his son, it was readily available and a xerox copy of the same was produced; that no exception can be taken to the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner and at any rate in view of the presumption against a person like the petitioner under Section 5(3) of the Act and the burden being on the purchaser to prove things to the contrary and that burden having not been discharged in any way, there is no occasion for this Court to interfere or disturb the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner for noticing this position and accordingly passing suitable order recording a finding that the legal heir of the grantee becomes entitled for the compensation payable in respect of the granted land. 11. The question as to whether the grantee belonged to the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community is a pure finding of fact. There was no Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in our society and our country prior to the Constitution of India. All persons, particularly those belonging to Hindu Community are identified by a particular caste or community and one such caste, sub-caste or group or tribe is made a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe depending upon inclusion of that caste or community in the schedule to the Presidential Order. The Presidential Order is issued in terms of the provisions of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India as the case may be, identifying a particular community as Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe respectively and the Presidential Order, in fact, has come to be amended from time to time, ever since the promulgation of the Ordinance in the year 1950. 12. Therefore, the question as to whether person belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is a pure question of fact to be determined on ascertaining as to whether a particular caste or community to which a person belongs is included in the schedule to either of these Orders. It may be that the original grantee had claimed as a person belonging to Scheduled Caste community, but that in itself is not the end of the matter. It may be that the original grantee had claimed as a person belonging to Scheduled Caste community, but that in itself is not the end of the matter. If the Deputy Commissioner in his examination and in the appeal preferred by the legal heir of the grantee finds that the particular community ‘nayaka’ community was one identified as Scheduled Tribe community in terms of the Presidential Order as amended from time to time, that is not a finding which can be made subject matter for argument, but if at all a verification of the fact. 13. While a finding of fact is not normally disturbed by this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, even a finding of fact which is per se impossible or blatantly at variance with the record becoming a perverse finding, perhaps could also be examined such as if a person should come to the conclusion that 2 + 2 adds up to 10. 14. While the writ petitioner had not made good the proposition that the grantee, in fact, did not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community on the date of the grant, which burden was very much on the petitioner being a subsequent purchaser and the first transaction itself being of the year 1995 and one admittedly without prior permission, all transactions thereafter are all voided by operation of Section 4 of the Act and this legal position is inevitable when once the factual position which was disputed in this writ petition that the person does belong to Scheduled Tribe community is established. 15. The mere fact that the original grantee either due to ignorance or for any other reason claimed that he belonged to Scheduled Caste community but later the Deputy Commissioner found that he actually belonged to Scheduled Tribe and, therefore, there was inconsistent stand or claim on behalf of the applicant-grantee cannot be a criteria to hold that either the person does not belong to Scheduled Tribe or he had not proved it per se etc. In a proceeding under the Act, particularly, in an inquiry under Section 5 of the Act, the proceedings are not adversary in nature, but a proceeding in the nature of statutory proceeding casting a duty on the Assistant Commissioner even to suo motu ascertain the factual position and to ensure resumption of the land if legal position is as per Section 4 of the Act. Such an inquiry having been held and the Deputy Commissioner having examined this matter and being satisfied that the grantee was a person who belonged to Scheduled Tribe community, had transacted the subject land after the Act coming into force and first purchaser having not obtained any permission from the State Government the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner which is to achieve the object of the Act, to effectuate the purpose of the Act is one that is not required to be interfered or in any way found fault with, but on the other hand required to be sustained even if found wanting on a few aspects. 16. Accordingly, this writ petition which is totally without any merit, is dismissed levying cost of Rs. 10,000/- on the petitioner payable to fifth respondent. 17. If cost is not deposited before the registry within a period of four weeks from today or an acknowledgement of receipt of this amount by the fifth respondent is also not filed in the registry within this four weeks, then registry to issue a certificate in favour of the fifth respondent, for realizing the amount as though it is a decree of a Civil Court. 18. Consequently, interim order granted by this Court on 23.4.2010 is vacated and Misc. W. 6761 of 2011 filed for vacating the interim order is allowed.