High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeThe writ petition is allowed. There will be no ...

Athiradhan T. Thilakan v. State of Kerala and Others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Murali Purushothaman
Judgment Date
2022-01-31
Court Decision / Holding
The writ petition is allowed. The petitioner is entitled to a Rural Certificate certifying that the petitioner pursued Class V in a rural school (Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Puthur). The Tahsildar is directed to issue the Rural Certificate within two weeks from production of this judgment. The provisional admission to Class VI shall be regularised if the petitioner is otherwise eligible, on production of the Rural Certificate. The Principal, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyala, Mayannur, is to be informed for compliance.
Final Disposition
The writ petition is allowed. There will be no order as to costs.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Athiradhan T. Thilakan

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by the Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram
  • The Tahsildar, Thrissur Taluk, Thrissur District
  • The Village Officer, Puthur Village Office, Thrissur District
  • The Principal, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyala, Mayannur P.O., Thrissur District

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • M. Shaju Purushothaman
  • • K. S. Rajesh

Counsels for Respondents

  • • M. K. Padmanabhan Nair
  • • Jimmi George

Case Synopsis & Summary

An 11-year-old student sought admission to Class VI in Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Mayannur. The central issue was whether the student could be admitted under the rural area criterion for JNV admissions, given conflicting rural–urban classifications. The petitioner, whose schooling was at Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Puthur within Puthur Grama Panchayat, claimed the area is rural and secured provisional admission (Ext P4) subject to obtaining a Rural Certificate. The Village Officer (3rd respondent) reported the area as rural (Ext P5), but the Tahsildar issued an urban certificate (Ext P6) citing the 2011 Census. The petitioner relied on James N.X. v District Collector and Niranjana Prakash, arguing that census data cannot override the Constitution or the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and that Section 10(3A) delimitation when gazetted defines rural areas for the purposes of Rural Certificate. The 2nd respondent maintained that the 2011 Census classification governs, and that the Rural Certificate was correctly refused. The court, applying James and Niranjana Prakash and noting that Census data cannot override constitutional and Panchayat Raj Act provisions, held that a rural area exists in the petitioner's case by virtue of Section 10(3A) delimitation and the gazetted order, and directed the Tahsildar to issue a Rural Certificate within two weeks. Provisional admission to VI standard to be regularised if otherwise eligible.

Provisions of Law Cited

Constitution of India Articles 243-O(a) and 243-KKerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 - Section 10(3A)Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 - Section 69(2A)Census Act, 1948Census Rules, 1990

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Census Act and Rules cannot override the Constitution or the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act regarding rural/urban classification.
  • Delimitation orders under Section 10(3A) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 when gazetted have the force of law under Articles 243-O(a) read with 243-K.
  • Areas within a Panchayat notified under Section 10(3A) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 are to be construed as rural for the purposes of Rural Certificates (as per the James standard).

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner and his counsel contended that the rural status of the area where the petitioner studied is established under the Panchayat Raj Act Section 10(3A) and gazetted delimitation, and that census data cannot override constitutional and statutory provisions; reliance was placed on James N.X. v District Collector (2012) 4 KHC 179 and Niranjana Prakash (minor) v Ministry of Education (2021) 4 KHC 395 to support rural eligibility for admission to Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya and to challenge reliance on the 2011 Census.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argued that the 2011 Census data classifies Puthur as an urban area; the Rural Certificate was correctly denied; they contended that census data is authoritative and that the NVS guidelines define rural/urban as per census or subsequent notification; they also highlighted that the certificate issued under the 2011 Census was prior to the Court’s decision in Ext.P7.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
James N.X. and Another v. District Collector, Ernakulam and Others2012(4) KHC 179PositiveCensus data cannot override constitutional and Panchayat Raj Act provisions; delimitation under Section 10(3A) defines rural area for the purpose of Rural Certificates.
Niranjana Prakash (minor) v. Ministry of Education and Others2021(4) KHC 395PositiveReiterates that census based classifications cannot override constitutional and Kerala Panchayat Raj Act requirements in rural/urban determination.
Judgment in WP(C) No.27857/202127857/2021 (WP(C))PositiveExhibit P7 relied upon to support the stance that related decisions align with rural-certification standards and 10(3A) delimitation principles.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Athiradhan T. Thilakan v. State of Kerala and Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN** **MONDAY, THE 31[ST] DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 11TH MAGHA, 1943** **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **ATHIRADHAN T. THILAKAN, AGED 11 YEARS S/O THILAKAN, THEARAMBIL HOUSE, NAMBIAR ROAD, PUTHUR P. O., THRISSUR, MINOR, REPRESENTED BY FATHER THILAKAN, S/O. SANKARANKUTTI, AGED 50 YEARS, THEARAMBIL HOUSE, NAMBIAR ROAD, PUTHUR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS. M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN K.S.RAJESH** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** |**1**|**STATE OF KERALA**| |---|---| ||**REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,**| ||**DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.**| |**2**|**THE TAHSILDAR**| ||**THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680020.**| |**3**|**THE VILLAGE OFFICER**| ||**PUTHUR VILLAGE OFFICE, PUTHUR P. O.,**| ||**THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680014.**| |**4**|**THE PRINCIPAL**| ||**JAWAHAR NAVODAYA VIDYALA, MAYANNUR P. O.,**| ||**THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 679105.**| **SHRI.M.K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, SC, NVS SRI.JIMMI GEORGE, SR.GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..2..** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner is a student aged 11 years who sought admission to the VI standard at the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya. He has approached this Court being aggrieved by the refusal on the part of the 2[nd] respondent Tahsildar in issuing the Rural Certificate to enable him to get admission to the VI standard in the 4[th] respondent school. 2. According to the petitioner, he was a student of Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Puthur, Thrissur District in V standard for the academic year 2020-2021 and the said school is within the territorial area of Puthur Grama Panchayat and hence a rural area. 3. As per the admission policy of 'Jawahar Novodaya Vidyalaya', only a student who had earlier **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..3..** studied in a school in a 'rural area' can obtain admission therein. The petitioner states that, for admission to standard VI of Jawahar Novodaya Vidyalaya, a written test was conducted and the petitioner came out successful as is evident from Ext.P3 rank list. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was granted provisional admission in the 4[th] respondent school by Ext. P4 communication. 4. For obtaining the Rural Area certificate, the petitioner submitted an application before the 3[rd] respondent Village Officer. The 3rd respondent issued Ext.P5 report stating that the area in which the petitioner is studying is a rural area. The petitioner produced the same before the Tahsildar. However, the Tahsildar issued Ext. P6 ‘Urban Certificate’ stating that Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Puthur is situated in an urban area. It is contended **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..4..** that the Tahsildar has issued the certificate based on the 2011 Census report. 5. According to the petitioner, the stand taken by the 2[nd] respondent on the petitioner's application for issuance of rural certificate cannot be sustained in view of the law laid down by this Court in **James N.X. and Another** _**v**_ . **District Collector, Ernakulam and Others [2012(4) KHC 179]** and **Niranjana Prakash (minor)** _**v**_ **. Ministry of Education and Others [2021 (4) KHC 395].** In **James** (supra), 'Rural Certificate' was denied on the ground that, as per the 2001 Census, the area where the school in which the student had studied was an Urban Area. This Court taking note of the provisions of the Constitution of India, the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and Census Act 1948 and Rules framed there under held that, the Census Act and the Rules framed there under cannot override **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..5..** the provisions of the Constitution and the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 with regard to the composition of Panchayats. It was also held that, areas in a Panchayat notified under Section 10(3A) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 will have to be construed as situated within a rural area. Once the final delimitation order is published and gazetted and an area is included within the limits of a Panchayat, all its area comprising different wards can only be considered as a “rural area”. Accordingly, the petitioner contends that, Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Puthur within the territorial area of Puthur Grama Panchayat is situated in rural area and has approached this Court to direct the 2nd respondent to issue ‘Rural Certificate’ for admission to standard VI in the 4[th] respondent school. **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..6..** 6. A Statement has been filed on behalf of the 2[nd] respondent, the Tahsildar stating that as per the 2011 Census records, Puthur, where the school is situated is classified as Town area and accordingly Ext.P6 certificate was issued. It is also stated that Ext.P6 certificate was issued before Ext.P7 judgement was rendered by this Court. In the Statement it is also stated that the Principal of Jawahar Novodaya the 4[th] has sent a Vidyalaya, respondent communication to the office of the 2[nd] respondent on 08.01.2022 _vide_ letter No. F18/JNVM/TCR/2021-22 in which it is again brought to the attention of all Revenue authorities that the NVS guidelines state that the Rural/Urban areas are defined as in 2011 census or through subsequent notification. 7.Heard Sri. M.Shaju Purushothaman, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Sreehari Rao, the **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..7..** learned standing counsel and Sri. Jimmy George the learned senior Government Pleader. 8. Ext.P1 issued by Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Puthur certifies that the petitioner was a student of the said school. Ext.P2 is the certificate issued by the Secretary of Puthur Grama Panchayath wherein it is stated that Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Puthur is situated within the territorial limits of Puthur Grama Panchayath. Therefore, going by the decision of this Court in **James** (supra), as long as the area where the petitioner's earlier school is situated is with in a panchayath as notified under Section 10 (3A) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, the said area can be construed only as a 'Rural Area'. The respondents have no case that the territorial area where the Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Puthur is situated **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..8..** is urban area as per orders passed and published under Section 10 (3A) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 or under Section 69 (2A) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994. The provisions of the Census Act, 1948 and the Census Rules, 1990 cannot override the provisions of the Constitution or the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the area cannot be classified as 'Urban' on the basis of Census Data for the purpose of issuance of rural certificate for admission to Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya. The order relevant is the order passed, published and gazetted under Section 10 (3A) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, which has the force of law under Article 243-O (a) read with 243-K of the Constitution of India. As held in **James** (supra), issuance of certificate in terms of orders passed and published under Section 10 (3A) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 will not violate the **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..9..** provisions of the prospects. 9. In view of the law laid down in **James** (supra) and reiterated in **Niranjana Prakash** and Ext.P7 judgment, the petitioner is entitled to be issued with a Rural Certificate. There will be a direction to the 2[nd] respondent to issue ‘Rural Certificate’ to the petitioner certifying that the petitioner had pursued his class V in Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Puthur, a school located in the rural area. The certificate shall be issued within a period of two weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The provisional admission granted to the petitioner to VI Standard as per Ext.P4 shall be regularised, if he is otherwise eligible, on production of the Rural Certificate. The writ petition is allowed. There will be no order as to costs. The Registry shall forthwith forward **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..10..** a copy of this Judgment to the 4[th] respondent, the Principal, Jawahar Novodaya Vidyalaya, Mayannur.P.O., Thrissur District for information. **Sd/MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE** SB/01/02/2022 **WP(C) NO. 367 OF 2022 ..11..** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 367/2022** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **Exhibit P1** **THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SCHOOL DATED 29.12.2021.** - **Exhibit P2** **THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE PUTHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 29.12.2021.** **Exhibit P3** - **THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE SELECT LIST FOR ADMISSION IN CLASS VI ISSUED BY CBSE DATED 24.09.2021.** - **Exhibit P4** - **THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 30.09.2021.** ## **Exhibit P5** **THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 04.10.2021.** - **Exhibit P6** **THE TRUE COPY OF THE URBAN CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 07.10.2021.** **Exhibit P7** **THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.27857/2021 DATED 08.12.2021.**