JUDGMENT M. Jaichandren, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties concerned. 2. The petitioner has stated that she belongs to `Kurumans', which is a Scheduled Tribe community. The community status of the petitioner has been entered as `Kurumans', in her school records. The petitioner had obtained the community certificate, from the first respondent, on 26.2.1996, stating that she belongs to `Kurumans' Schedule Tibe community. The petitioner has been working, as a graduate teacher, in the Government Higher Secondary School, Errapatti Village, Dharmapuri District. The community status of the petitioner has been shown as `Kurumans', in her service records. 3. It has been further stated that the petitioner has two children, namely, K.Thileepan and K.Iniya. The petitioner had submitted an application, to the first respondent, on 2.12.2013, for the issuance of community certificates to her children stating that they belong to `Kurumans' Scheduled Tribe community. The relevant records had also been enclosed, along with the said application, to substantiate the claim made by the petitioner. Since no order had been passed, on the application received by the first respondent, on 2.12.2013, the petitioner had been constrained to file a writ petition, before this court, in W.P.No.13782 of 2014, to direct the first respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner. This court, by an order, dated 21.5.2014, had directed the first respondent to consider the application of the petitioner, dated 2.12.2013, and to pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits, within the specified period. Thereafter, the petitioner had been called for an enquiry, by the first respondent. Even though the petitioner had furnished all the relevant details, the first respondent had rejected the application of the petitioner, arbitrarily, without proper application of mind, on 30.5.2014. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the rejection of the application of the petitioner is erroneous and invalid in the eye of law. Proper reasons have not been given for the rejection of the application submitted by the petitioner, to declare the community status of her children. The first respondent ought to have issued the community certificate, as prayed for by the petitioner, without any enquiry, as the community certificate issued in favour of the petitioner states that she belongs to `Kurumans', a Scheduled Tribe community. The first respondent ought to have issued the community certificate, as prayed for by the petitioner, without any enquiry, as the community certificate issued in favour of the petitioner states that she belongs to `Kurumans', a Scheduled Tribe community. A similar certificate ought to have been issued to her children stating that she belongs to `Kurumans' a Scheduled Tribe community. However, without considering the relevant aspects, the first respondent had rejected the application of the petitioner, on frivolous grounds. 5. It had also been submitted that the order passed, by this court, in W.P.No.13782 of 2014, had not been followed, properly. Therefore, this court may be pleased to set aside the impugned order passed by the first respondent, dated 30.5.2014, and to direct the first respondent to issue the community certificate, to the children of the petitioner, stating that they belong to `Kurumans' community. 6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the claims made by the petitioner, with regard to the community status of her children, are not based on evidence. The first respondent had found that a number of discrepancies were existing in the records furnished by the petitioner in support of her claims. Further, the petitioner has not produced sufficient evidence to substantiate her claim. Therefore, the first respondent had refused to grant the community certificates to the children of the petitioner stating that they belong to `Kurumans' Scheduled Tribe community. In such circumstances, the first respondent had rightly rejected the claims made by the petitioner. 7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned and on a perusal of the records available, it is noted that the respondents had rejected the application of the petitioner, for the issuance of the community certificates in favour of her children, stating that they belong to `Kurumans' Schedule Tribe community, as there were certain serious discrepancies in the records submitted by the petitioner. It is also noted that the petitioner had not furnished the relevant records, before the first respondent, to substantiate her claim that the petitioner and her children belong to `Kurumans' Schedule Tribe community. It is also noted that the petitioner had not furnished the relevant records, before the first respondent, to substantiate her claim that the petitioner and her children belong to `Kurumans' Schedule Tribe community. Due to the serious discrepancies found in the records submitted by the petitioner, the first respondent had arrived at the conclusion that the claim of the petitioner, for the issuance of the community certificates in favour of her children, stating that they belong to `Kurumans' Schedule Tribe community, is not acceptable. Therefore, we do not find it appropriate to set aside the order passed by the first respondent, rejecting the claims made by the petitioner. However, we find it appropriate to direct the first respondent herein to place the matter before the State Level Scrutiny Committee, which has been impleaded as the second respondent in the present writ petition, by an order, passed on 18.6.2014, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, for considering the claims made by the petitioner, afresh, by causing an enquiry. On receipt of the application and the relevant records relating to the issuance of the community certificates, for the children of the petitioner, the second respondent, namely, the State Level Scrutiny Committee, shall cause an enquiry and pass appropriate orders thereon, without being influenced by the observations made by the first respondent, in his impugned order, dated 30.5.2014, by following the procedures established by law and by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks thereafter. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.