WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page1 of 15

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 25-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

AND

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

and

WMP(MD)No.5401 of 2022

Sameer Ahamed. N

S/o. Narayanan,

1/35, North Street,

Terku Ilandaikulam,

Thoothukudi District 628 952.

..Petitioner(s)

Vs.

1.The District Collector

Thoothukudi District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

O/o. The Revenue Divisional Office,

Thoothukudi District.

3.The Tahsildar, Thoothukudi District.

4.The Secretary to Government,

Government of Tamil Nadu, Backward Classes,

Most Backward Classes and Minorities Welfare

Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

(R4 suo motu impleaded vide court order dated

11.06.2026 in WP(MD)No.7127 of 2022 by

GRSJ AND RPJ)

..Respondent(s) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page2 of 15

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the

records of the impugned rejection order of the online application of the

Petitioner in Application No. TN-5202010151817 on the file of 3rd respondent

and quash the same as illegal, consequently direct the respondent to issue

community certificate to the Petitioner as Muslim Lebbai and to pass such

further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the

circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):Mr.Maheswaran.R

For Respondent(s):Mr.L.Siva, Government Advocate

ORDER

(By G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)

Paramasivam S/o Narayanan becoming Sameer Ahamed would have

passed off as exercise of one’s fundamental right under Article 25 of the

Constitution of India. But when after such metamorphosis, the convertee

continues to claim the benefit of reservation, it triggers yet another

conversation, nay debate, on the legitimacy and legality of such demand.

2.The writ petitioner was born on 12.04.1993 to a Hindu couple

Narayanan and Gomathiammal in Tuticorin District. The certificate issued by

Sunnath Jamath, Kayathar on 11.09.2015 states that the petitioner embraced

Islam and also changed his name to Sameer Ahamed. Gazette publication was https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page3 of 15

made on 02.11.2016. The writ petitioner married one Vahitha as per Islamic

rites and customs on 04.11.2016. Two children have been born through the

wedlock. The petitioner applied for community certificate certifying him as

“Muslim Lebbai”. The petitioner claims to follow the faith of Lebbai Muslims.

His application was rejected by the Tahsildar, Kayathar. Challenging the same,

this writ petition came to be filed.

3.Notice was issued 19.04.2022. It was taken up on 16.06.2022. It saw

the light of the day only on 09.06.2026. The counsel for the writ petitioner was

fair enough to submit that only in view of G.O (Ms) No.31, BC, MBC and MW

Department dated 09.03.2024, he has a case. The Bench comprising one of us

(GRSJ) and Justice R.Poornima after going through the said G.O, felt that it

may not withstand judicial scrutiny. On 11.06.2026, the Government was

impleaded as a party. The matter was called on 16.06.2026 and again posted to

22.06.2026. On 23.06.2026, the learned Additional Advocate General appeared

and made certain prefatory remarks.

4.Today, when the matter was taken up for final disposal, the learned

Additional Advocate General filed a detailed counter affidavit as well as a typed

set of papers enclosing the relevant G.Os. But, before he could make his

submissions, the counsel for the petitioner informed the court that he had given

change of vakalat. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page4 of 15

5.Given that the matter was taken up on so many occasions and that the

counsel had also made his submissions and the matter was posted “for orders”

only for the purpose of testing the validity of G.O (Ms)No.31 dated 09.03.2024,

the petitioner is not being fair to the court by adopting the devious method of

taking change of vakalat. We do not blame the counsel. He after all has to go

by instructions. But on this ground, we do not want to adjourn this case either.

As indicated at the outset, the writ petitioner had no case when he filed the writ

petition. Life was infused into his case only by virtue of the aforesaid G.O. If

the G.O is sustained, the writ petition has to be allowed. If the G.O is found to

be bad in law, the petition will suffer dismissal. The Government has filed

counter affidavit and the learned Additional Advocate General himself has

appeared to strongly espouse the cause of the petitioner.

6.The G.O has a background. One U.Akbar Ali who belonged to the

MBC category became a Muslim and wanted to be considered for public

employment under BC(Muslim) category. TNPSC took the stand that he will

come under General Category. The matter was heard at length by one of us

(GRSJ) sitting singly. Vide order dated 01.12.2022 in WP(MD)No.1019 of

2022, I upheld the stand of TNPSC. In doing so, I merely followed the

Division Bench decision of the Madras High Court rendered in G.Michael v. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page5 of 15

S.Venkateswaran (1952) 1 MLJ 239 and the decision rendered in S.Yasmine v.

The Secretary, TNPSC 2013 (4) CTC 53. The substance of the said decisions

was that when a person converts to Islam, he becomes a Muslim and his place in

Muslim society is not determined by the caste to which he belonged before his

conversion. The said decision probably disincentivised conversion to Islam as

the beneficiaries of reservation face the prospect of losing the said benefit.

Islam being a proselytising religion, its votaries naturally took up the matter

with the Government. The matter was referred to the Tamil Nadu Backward

Classes Commission which vide letter dated 06.02.2024 recommended that the

government rationalise the granting of Backward Class Muslim community

certificate to those persons, belonging to Backward Classes, Most Backward

Classes, Denotified Communities or Scheduled Castes on conversion to any one

of the 7 groups or sections of Muslims identified as Backward Class Muslim

and issue community certificates as Backward Class Muslim, enabling them to

avail the benefits of reservation extended to Backward Class Muslims.

7.The learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the said

recommendation is binding on the Government which issued G.O (Ms) No.31

dated 09.03.2024. According to him, the G.O was not issued arbitrarily. There

was a meeting of the stakeholders and only after a detailed deliberation, did the

Commission make its recommendation. He pointed out that a convert from a https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page6 of 15

forward community to Islam would not get the B.C (Muslim) tag. Only those

who already enjoyed the benefit of reservation would not lose it on account of

conversion to Islam. Thus, according to him, the social balance will not be

affected. He added that the identified sects in Islam follow particular faith and

practices and it was for the Jamath concerned to accept the convertee in one of

the sects. Once the Jamath has issued a certificate, it is not for the revenue

authority to question the same. He submitted in passing that the court also

would not be justified in reviewing the same. He called upon us not to strike

down the said G.O.

8.Though our Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of

religion, race, caste, sects, place of birth or any of them, the State was

authorised to make special provision for the advancement of any socially and

educationally backward classes of citizens or for the scheduled castes or the

scheduled tribes. Reservation policies are in furtherance of the aforesaid

constitutional mandate. Since on the only ground of religion, one cannot be

conferred with the benefit of reservation, the government has enumerated a list

of backward classes apart from cataloguing Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes. In the case on hand, we are concerned only with backward class

reservation for Muslims. The Government of Tamil Nadu has consciously, and

if we may say so, rightly did not include all persons professing Islam under the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page7 of 15

BC category. It identified only a few sects in Islam as falling under the

category of backward class. One can take judicial notice of the fact that certain

sects such as Dawoodi Bohras are socially and educationally advanced. The

original list of BC(Muslims) was subsequently expanded on the basis of

representations received from the members of the particular communities. As

on date, the following 7 sects of Muslims have been notified as Backward Class

Muslims as per Section 3(a) of the Tamil Nadu Act 45 of 1994 :

“1.Ansar

2.Dekkani Muslims

3.Dubekula

4.Labbais including Rowthar and Marakayar (whether their spoken

language is Tamil or Urdu)

5.Mapilla

6.Sheik

7.Syed”

A Muslim who does not belong to any of the aforesaid 7 sects cannot be called

as a BC(Muslim).

9.The Government of Tamil Nadu vide G.O (Ms) No.31 dated 09.03.2024

had ordered that a convert to Islam from Backward Classes, Most Backward

Classes, Denotified Communities or Scheduled Castes may be treated as

BC(Muslim) for availing the benefit of reservation and on such conversion, he

may be issued with community certificate as belonging to one of the notified 7

sects. The moot question is whether such a stand is constitutionally valid. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page8 of 15

10.As early as in 1951, the First Bench of the Madras High Court

comprising Their Lordships Mr.Justice P.V.Rajamannar (CJ) and Mr.Justice

T.L.Venkatarama Aiyar in G.Michael v. S.Venkateswaran (1952) 1 MLJ 239

held that when a Hindu gets converted to Islam, he becomes just a Mussalman

and his place in Muslim society is not determined by the caste to which he

belonged before his conversion. It was further held that a member of one of the

castes or sub-castes when he is converted to Islam ceases to be a member of any

caste. This decision was approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in

Kailash Sonkar v. Maya Devi (1984) 2 SCC 91; K.P.Manu v. Scrutiny

Committee (2015) 4 SCC 1 and C.Selvarani v. Special Secretary cum District

Collector (2024) 16 SCC 537. C.Selvarani decision was pronounced on

26.11.2024 ie., subsequent to the aforesaid G.O.

11.G.Michael decision is also in consonance with Islamic theology. The

Holy Quran Proclaims the principle of equality in the following verse :

“O humanity! Indeed, We created you from a male and a

female, and made you into peoples and tribes so that you may ˹get

to˺ know one another. Surely the most noble of you in the sight of

Allah is the most righteous among you. Allah is truly All-Knowing,

All-Aware. - [Sura: Huzurat Ayat No. 13]”

The Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him), in his farewell sermon stated as

follows : https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page9 of 15

"All mankind is from Adam and Eve. An Arab has no superiority

over a non-Arab, nor does a non-Arab have any superiority over an

Arab; a white person has no superiority over a black person, nor a

black person over a white person, except by piety and good

deeds. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that

the Muslims constitute one brotherhood.”

The Christian missionaries as well as Islamic preachers harangued through

decades and centuries that their religions offer social equality unlike Hinduism

which has caste as its inherent feature. Having taken such a stand for effecting

conversions, it is disingenuous to claim that there is hierarchy in Islam also. In

our respectful view, categorising certain sects as Backward and the remaining as

Forward is antithetical to Quranic injunctions. Islam seeks to establish an

egalitarian society. Everyone is equal in the eye of God. There is no social

hierarchy. Be that as it may, due to historical reasons, the Islamic society is

also stratified into various communities. One can even boldly remark that they

are akin to caste in Hinduism. Just as caste is determined by birth, one is a

Rowther or Marakkayar or Deccani Muslim by birth alone. It is ridiculous to

suggest that one can be converted into a Rowther Muslim. As held by the

Division Bench of the Madras High Court more than 75 years ago, upon

conversion to Islam, one becomes a Muslim. The Hon’ble Division Bench

used the expression “just a Mussalman”. He cannot be pigeonholed into any

particular sect or community which can be only by virtue of one’s birth therein. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page10 of 15

12.When the proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Division Bench is

holding the field, it cannot be undone by issuing a mere Government Order.

13.The doctrine of separation of powers is an entrenched principle in the

Constitution of India and that it is an essential constituent of rule of law. This

principle applies to the final judgments of the courts. The legislature cannot

declare any decision of a court of law to be void or of no effect. A court's

decision must always bind unless the conditions on which it is based or so

fundamentally altered that the decision could not have been given in the altered

circumstances (vide State of T.N v. State of Kerala (2014) 12 SCC 696). While

the legislature has power and competence to make a validating law, the

executive has no such privilege. It can never go against the final judgment of a

court.

14.If the exercise of the power of judicial review can be set at naught by

the State Government by overriding the decision against it, it would sound the

death knell of the rule of law (vide P.Sambamurthy v. State of A.P (1987) 1

SCC 362). The executive cannot sit in an appeal or review or revise a judicial

order (UOI v. K.N.Shankarappa (2001) 1 SCC 582).

15.When the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in G.Michael had

held that a convert to Islam becomes just a Mussalman, it is not open to the

State Government to issue a G.O undermining the said decision. That is exactly

what the Government has done by recognising that there can be conversion to

any one of the 7 sects of Muslims identified as Backward Class Muslim. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page11 of 15

16.The sheer arbitrariness of the impugned G.O. becomes manifest for

one more reason. The Backward Classes Commission’s recommendation as

well as G.O (Ms) No.31 dated 09.03.2024 provide for accommodating

BC/MBC/DNC/SC convertees in any one of the 7 slots. In other words, a SC

who is at the bottom-most rung of the social ladder is put on par with a BC. The

Hon’ble Supreme Court in catena of decisions has held that OBCs and SCs

form separate categories. Just for the sake of ensuring that the converts to Islam

continue to enjoy some form of reservation benefit, such a bunching has been

done by the State Government. This exposes the inherent flaw in the approach

adopted by the Government.

17.One can take judicial notice of the fact that when a person embraces

Islam, the Jamath issues a certificate to the effect that he has become a Muslim.

Even in the petitioner’s case, the certificate issued by the Sunnath Jamath of

Kayathar certifies that he has embraced the Islamic path. We have no option

but to conclude that only to undo the judgments of this Court, has the

Government come out with an innovation that is not only unconstitutional but

also un-Islamic.

18.The third respondent, in a pithy order had noted that the petitioner had

converted to a religion and not to any caste. Though some may take umbrage at

equating an Islamic community with caste, this is not without precedent. The

Madras Census Report, 1901 referred the Labbais as being a “Mussalman caste https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page12 of 15

of partly Tamil origin who are distinct from the Marakkayars, as they do not

intermarry with them”. Edgar Thurston has catalogued the castes and tribes of

Southern India and one finds “Deccani” in his list. This reinforces our

conclusion that one becomes a member of a notified sect such as Syed or Sheik

or Labbai only by virtue of one’s birth in the said community. The stand of the

Government that there can be conversion to a notified Islamic sect is

inconceivable in principle. When we consulted the standard texts, we found

that sects normally meant Shia or Sunni or the sub-sects therein such as Hanafi,

Ismaili etc., What has been notified in G.O (Ms) No.85 dated 29.07.2008 can

only be called as communities and not as sects.

19.The learned Additional Advocate General submitted that in quite a few

Division Bench decisions (WA No.2813 of 2021) etc., G.O (Ms) No.31 dated

09.03.2024 has been acted upon. This is no answer. In those decisions, the

validity of this G.O was not in issue. It was also not considered if the said G.O

overreached or circumvented what was laid down in G.Michael. Question may

arise if we are justified in testing its validity, when the petitioner as well as the

respondents swear by the G.O. We want to remind the Government that in

Bharathidhasan University v. AICTE (2001) 8 SCC 676, the Hon’ble Supreme

Court held that when the power to make regulations is confined to certain limits

and made to flow in a well defined canal within stipulated bans, those actually

made or shown and found to be not made within its confines but outside them, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page13 of 15

the courts are bound to ignore them when the question of their enforcement

arises and the mere fact that there was no specific relief sought for to strike

down or declare them ultra-vires, particularly, when the party in sufferance is a

respondent to the lis or proceedings cannot confer any further sanctity or

authority and validity which it is shown and found to obviously and patently

lack.

20.In these proceedings, the enforcement of G.O (Ms) No.31, BC, MBC

and MWD dated 09.03.2024 has come up for consideration. The State

government is very much a party to these proceedings. Counter affidavit has

been filed and we heard the learned Additional Advocate General also at length

on this very issue. Once we find that the said G.O is illegal, it is our bounden

judicial duty to declare it to be so. We accordingly declare that the said G.O is

unconstitutional. The order impugned in the writ petition is sustained. This writ

petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition

is closed. As a corollary, we hold that a convert to Islam cannot claim the status

of Backward Class Muslim. He is only a Muslim and that’s all there is to it.

(G.R.S.,J.) (P.B.B.,J.)

25-06-2026

Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No

SKM https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page14 of 15

To

1.The District Collector

Thoothukudi District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

O/o. The Revenue Divisional Office,

Thoothukudi District.

3.The Tahsildar

Thoothukudi District.

4.The Secretary to Government,

Government of Tamil Nadu, Backward Classes,

Most Backward Classes and Minorities Welfare

Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

__________

Page15 of 15

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

AND

P.B.BALAJI, J.

SKM

WP(MD) No. 7127 of 2022

and

WMP(MD)No.5401 of 2022

25-06-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis