JUDGMENT : S. MANIKUMAR, J. 1. Claiming himself to be the President of Tamil Nadu Scheduled Tribe (Malayali) Pervai, instant writ petition is filed for a writ of declaration, declaring that the non-inclusion of Malayalis of Erode District of Tamil Nadu, as Schedule Tribes, in S.No.25 of Part XIV, in the Schedule to the Constitution (Schedule Tribes Order), 1950 as amended, as ultra vires to the Constitution of India and consequently, to direct the respondents to extend all benefits that are provided to other Malayalis in the said list, including the benefit of reservation in Public Employment to the Malayalis in Erode District of Tamil Nadu. 2. Supporting the prayer sought for, it is stated that the petitioner Peravai is a registered Welfare Organisation, bearing Registration No.307/1993, under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. Malayali, a Tribal Community of Tamil Nadu, living in Salem, Tiruchirapalli and North Arcot Districts have been notified as a Scheduled Tribe by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order, 1956, issued under Article 342 of the Constitution of India. After bifurcation of Pudukottai from Tiruchirapalli and Dharmapuri from Salem, Malayalis of these two Districts were also added in the list of Scheduled Tribes by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Act, 1976. 3. Malayali Community consists of 5 lakh people inhabiting in the erstwhile Districts of Tiruchirapalli, North Arcot, South Arcot, Salem and Coimbatore. After bifurcation of the respective Districts, at various stages, community people are living in the Districts of Salem, Namakkal, Dharmapuri, Vellore, Villupuram, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruchirapalli, Perambalur and Erode. 4. As per the said Constitution Amendment Order 1956, Malayalis in the Districts of Tiruchirapalli, North Arcot and Salem were listed as Scheduled Tribes and subsequently, South Arcot Malayalis were also included in the ST list of Tamil Nadu. Malayalis native of Erode District are not covered by the said order and hence Malayalis of Erode District are not issued with community certificate as ST. 5. In Erode District, Malayalis are living in Kadambur Kalimalai of Sathyamangalam Taluk and Burgur hills of Anthiyur taluk, Kadambur Kalimalai was originally falling under Sathyamangalam taluk of Coimbatore District, and Burgur hills was originally falling under Bhavani taluk of Coimbatore District. When Coimbatore was bifurcated into Erode District, in 1979, Sathyamangalam has been demarcated under Erode District. Likewise, Anthiyur Taluk, under which Burgur Malai falls was formed in 22/11/2012, under Erode District. 6. When Coimbatore was bifurcated into Erode District, in 1979, Sathyamangalam has been demarcated under Erode District. Likewise, Anthiyur Taluk, under which Burgur Malai falls was formed in 22/11/2012, under Erode District. 6. In Gazette of Salem District, Vol-I, Part I of the year 1918, it is clearly mentioned at page Nos.152 and 153 that Kolli Malayalis are also found in Palamalai, Burgurmalai and Kalimalai. Existence of Malayalis in Burgur hills (previously part of Coimbatore District) of the present day Erode District is mentioned in the manual of Coimbatore District in the year 1887 at page No.7 that Malayalis similar to those in the Shevaroys and Kollimalai are living in Burgur hills. 7. It is further stated in the affidavit that the study conducted by Tribal Research Centre (TRC), Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare, establishes the fact that Malayali tribal settlements are prevalent in Erode District. According to the petitioner, the Director of Tribal Research Centre, vide letter in R.C.No.372/A2/2012, dated 27/5/2013 and in letter R.C.No.TD/B2/2599/2012, dated 5/7/2013, respectively, had recommended to include Malayalis of Erode District, in the ST list of Tamil Nadu. 8. Petitioner has been continuously urging the respondents to include Malayalis of Erode District in the list of ST of Tamil Nadu, by their letters, dated 12/12/2013, 9/2/2015, 12/5/2015, 3/11/2015, 25/10/2015, 6/5/2016, 13/5/2016, 3/1/2017, 28/3/2018 and 4/3/2019. As Malayalis of Erode District are not included in the list of STs, they are not able to get ST Community certificate and therefore, they are deprived of the constitutional rights, as availed by other Malayalis of Tamil Nadu thereby, unable to improve their standard of life. 9. In the abovesaid circumstances, petitioner has come forward with the instant writ petition, praying for the relief as stated therein. 10. Material on record discloses that acting on the representations, Director, Tribal Research Centre, M.Palada, Udhagamandalam, has written a letter, in R.C.No.372/A2/2012, dated 27/5/2013, to the Director, Tribal Welfare Department, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai, fourth respondent. The said letter reads thus:- With reference to the proposal for replacement of the existing entry ‘Malayali’ by ‘Malayali Gounder’ in the list of Scheduled tribes of Tamil Nadu throughout the State of Taml Nadu, without area restriction, the requisite clarifications are furnished below:- (i). The said letter reads thus:- With reference to the proposal for replacement of the existing entry ‘Malayali’ by ‘Malayali Gounder’ in the list of Scheduled tribes of Tamil Nadu throughout the State of Taml Nadu, without area restriction, the requisite clarifications are furnished below:- (i). The proposal for replacement of the existing entry ‘Malayali’ by ‘Malayali Gounder’ in the list of the Scheduled Tribes of Tamil Nadu without area restriction is not at all proper and tenable. And such impugned proposal, instead of benefiting the genuine Malayali tribes, will rather hamper their welfare by paving way for grabbing of their due rights and privileges by the non-tribal caste groups bearing the caste suffix ‘Gounder’ who are inhabiting the plains throughout the State of Tamil Nadu. (ii). Due to such unwanted and unwarranted replacement of the existing entry ‘Malayali’ by ‘Malayali Gounder’, unnecessary confusion will be created among the genuine hill tribes ‘Malayali’ who were issued already with the Scheduled Tribe Community certificates hearing the ethnonym ‘Malayali’’. Hence it is submitted that there is no necessity to admit the proposal for replacement of the existing entry ‘Malayali’ (Serial Number 25) in the list of Scheduled Tribes of Tamil Nadu by ‘Malayali Gounder’. It is submitted further that the newly carved out districts of Tamil Nadu, viz., ERODE (out of the earlier undivided Salem District). PERAMBALUR (out of the earlier undivided Tiruchirapalli District) and THIRUVANNAMALAI (out of the earlier undivided North Arcot District) inhabited by the hill tribes ‘Malayali’ may also be considered to be included as the added areas to the existing arenas ear marked for this tribal group, namely ‘Malayali’. 11. Subsequently, vide letter No.TD/B2/2599/2012, dated 5/7/2013, Director, Directorate of Tribal Welfare, Chennai has written a letter to the Secretary to the Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Chennai and the same reads thus:- I am to invite kind attention to the Government letter, 1st cited. The Director of Tribal Research Centre, Ooty has submitted the following two points for the consideration of the Government. a. There is no necessity to admit the proposal for replacement of the existing entry ‘Malayali’ (Sl.No.25) in the list of Scheduled Tribes of Tamil Nadu by ‘Malayali Gounder’. (b). The Director of Tribal Research Centre, Ooty has submitted the following two points for the consideration of the Government. a. There is no necessity to admit the proposal for replacement of the existing entry ‘Malayali’ (Sl.No.25) in the list of Scheduled Tribes of Tamil Nadu by ‘Malayali Gounder’. (b). The newly carved out Districts of Tamil Nadu viz, Erode (out of the earlier undivided Salem District) Perambalur (out of the earlier undivided Tiruchirapalli District) and Thiruvannamalai (out of the earlier undivided North Arcot District) inhibited by the hill tribes ‘Malayali’ may also be considered to be included as the added areas to the existing arenas ear marked for this tribal group namely ‘Malayali’. Hence on the above observations of Director, Tribal Research Centre, Ooty, I hereby recommend the above points for the kind consideration of the Government and further course of action at Government level. 12. Though the petitioner has sought for the prayer stated supra, this Court is not inclined to issue any order or direction in the nature of writ, except to direct the Secretary to the Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Chennai, to take a decision on the recommendations stated supra, if not done earlier and communicate the same to the writ petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. 13. With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. No costs.