Judgment M. Jaichandren, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. This Writ Petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarfied Mandamus to call for and quash the order of the second respondent, dated 07.11.2013, and to direct the second respondent to issue Community Certificates to the children of the petitioner stating that they belong to 'Hindu Kattunayakkan Community'. 3. The petitioner has stated that she belongs to 'Hindu Kattunayakkan Community', which is a Scheduled Tribe Community, as per G.O.Ms.No.1773, Social Welfare Department, dated 23.06.1984. The petitioner had married one Murugan, who is also belonging to 'Hindu Kattunayakkan Community' and out of their wedlock, four children were born to them. The petitioner has also stated that she was issued with a Community Certificate, by the second respondent, on 21.09.1994, stating that she belongs to 'Hindu Kattunayakkan Community'. Her daughter Selva Ambiga has also been issued with a Community Certificate, by the second respondent, stating that she belongs to 'Hindu Kattunayakkan Community'. 4. In such circumstances, the petitioner has made a representation, on 04.08.2011, requesting the respondents to issue Community Certificates to the other three children of the petitioner. A similar representation had also been made to the District Collector, Tirunelveli District, on 28.11.2012. Based on the said representation, the second respondent had conducted a spot enquiry and had passed an order, dated 07.11.2013, rejecting the request of the petitioner, without assigning any valid reason. Hence, the petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. At this stage of the hearing of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the order passed by the second respondent, dated 07.11.2013, may be set aside and the second respondent may be directed to place the matter before the State Level Scrutiny Committee, the first respondent herein, for passing appropriate orders, on the request of the petitioner, after conducting a proper enquiry. 6. 6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents, and on a perusal of the records available, we are of the considered view that this Court cannot go into the disputed questions of fact relating to the community status of the petitioner and her family members. In similar matters, this Court had taken a view that such disputed questions relating to the community status of the claims are to be placed before the State Level Scrutiny Committee, which has the necessary expertise to find out the facts and to submit its report, with regard to the community status of the claimants. 7. In such circumstances, we find it appropriate to set aside the impugned order of the second respondent, dated 07.11.2013, and to direct the second respondent to place the matter before the first respondent State Level Scrutiny Committee, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, to consider the claims of the petitioner, by conducting proper enquiries, and to give its report and to pass appropriate orders, with regard to the community status of her family members. The State Level Scrutiny Committee shall complete the said exercise, within a period of eight weeks thereafter, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of, with the above directions. No costs.