Rampal v. State of Haryana and others

Heard Sri S. Laxma Reddy, learned Senior Designated Counse! representing, Sri Allika Suresh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petationer, learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare, appearing on behalf of respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri K. Aravind Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.4.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under: "...to. issue a writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the impugnec, proceedings in Rc.No.D3-4674/OO dated 16.03.2006 as well as the proceedings in Rc.No.BB 7856/89 dated 26.12.1995 said to have been issued by the 2nd respondent behind back of the petitioner as totally illegal, without jurisdiction and violation of Articles 14, t6 and 21 of Constitution of India and in violation of the basic principles of natural justice (- 2 \.] and consequently set aside the same with all consequ€rntial reliefs and pass such other order or orders as; the Court may deem fit and proper in the circurnstances of the case. "

3. The briet facts of the case are that the petitioner's grandfather hails from Bhadrachalam and belongs to "\/almiki Community".'l'he petitioner's father secured employnrent the railways and was transferred from place to plar:e and finally retired in Khandwa. The petitioner's father belongs to Scheduled Tribe caste "Valmiki". The respondent No.,Z after due verification issued ST Caste Certificate to the petitioner dated 19.07.1r)85 and petitioner was appointed as Trains Clerk on 23.04.1988. Before the petitioner was appointed in railways, the t)etitioner applied to the post of Probationary Officer in Andhra Bank against the reserved S.T category. Thereafter, en the complaint made by the Divisional Secretary, AISTISTREA, Hyderabad, Respondent No.4 issued notice to the petitioner to produce the original Caste Certificate. 5;ubsequently, termination notice dated

01.08.2006 was issued by respondent No.4 stating that the petitioner casto certificate issued by respondent No..l was J cancelled by the Joint Collectot vide proceedings dated

26.t2.1995 and the same was communicated to the railways vide letter of District Joint Collector.. dated 16.03.2006. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. PERUSED THE RECORD:-

4. ParaqraDh No.3 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the resoonden is extracted hereunder: "I submit that the W.P.No.16659 of 2006 does not disclose any valid cause of action and the writ petition including the relief sought is misconceived, baseless, and incorrect. The Petitioner is misrepresenting the factual position with regard to his appointment as Train Clerk on 23-04-1988 against the post.reserved to the schedule tribe. The Petitioner was further promot'ed as Goods Guard in the year 1992 and as Passenger Guard in the year 1998 and continuing as such under the reserved category. The caste certificate as schedule tribe was subject matter of investigation under the provisions of A.P (SC, ST & BCs) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates' Act, 1993. The District Collector, Khammam vide Proceeding R.C.No.88/7856/89 't 4 dtd 26-'..2-t995 has cancelled the caste certificate issued try Mandal Revenue Officer, Badrachalam vide R.i:;.No.C/577/85 dtd, 19-07-1985 with dre opporturrity to the petitioner and 'piublished tre same in the District Gazette on 02-03-2000. Tre Petition€ r has not availed the opportunity to adduce evidence and substantiate the claim and file an appeal within the stipulated time as provided under the Act. The said cancellaticn having trecome final and appeal having not ber:n filed as provided in Section-7 of Act, the W-it Petition challenging the Notice dated 01-08-2006 is miscolceived and the writ petition deserves to be dismissed with costs.

5. The relevant oortion of the Imouoned Order .2006 of the 2n" res ted 16. extracted hereunder: "The Dir3ctor, TW, Hyderabad, has reported that Sri Thu-pakula Ramakrishna, S/o. BT. Ramulu, is an ordinary resident of Ulindikonda of Kurno,ll District, which is not declared as Agency Tractrj, the candidate cannot be treated as a member oF Scheduled Tribe. Further requested to arrange for cancellat on of the community certificate issued to the said ndividual by the Mandal Revenue Office-, Bhadrachalam of Khammam Dist. : 5 The detailed enouirv has been conducted and as the ST Der Valimi Caste Certifica te obtained from the Drocedu IR v n Officer Bhadr c R.Dis.No.C-577l85, dt.19.O7.85 bv Sri T.Rama Krishna, S/o. BT. Ramulu. has been cancelled vide this office oroceedinqs (copv Rc.No.88-7856/89. dt.26.12.95 enclosed)." 6 The releva nfnrl rtion of t e irnnrranad ord er !n Prtc No.B8-78 s6lAg dated

5.12.1995. !s extracted here nder: "5. The individual was issued a show cause notice vide this office reference 3'd cited to submit his explanation within (7) days from the date of receipt of show cause notice for having obtained certificate keeping the officials in darkness and obtained bogus certificate without bringing the facts to the notice of the officers and the show cause notices were sent to his residential address at Kurnool as well as to ice which was sent bv Bhadrachalam. The n reqd. ost to the r idential address of Kurnool. has returned to this office with the endorsed that no such addressee at KurnooI bv the Dost M.R.O.. man and the 6 chalam, has a lso repo din Jhe Bhadra referen a 4th indivi al is d wherea bouts are not kn wn arfd the show cause notice was published in Executive Officer, Gram P,nnchayat Office, police Station, M.p.p. Office, IU.R.O's Office, Village Chawadi and also by beat of tom tom in Bhadrachalam town and no resp,)nse is received for the show cause notice is:;ued by this offlce so far. 6. After examining the evidence put forth before rre and as per the enquiries made by the Director of Tribal Welfare, Hyderabad, it is established that Sri T.Rama Krishna, S/o. B.T, Ramulu, does not belongs to ..Valmiki,, Tribe of Bhadracl'alam, Khammam Dist. In vtew of

7. exercrse of the Govt. bove facts and wers conferred bv the s.w.( 2) G.O.M .No.2a2 DeDartm 2 t' 'Valmiki" caste certificate issued r and IR e n I Vide t lam vt L9.7 .85. is herebv cancelled." .D N -57 85 7 Learned Senior Designated Counsel appearing on rehalf ot the petitioner submits that as per Section 5 of the 7 Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Castes Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993, it is the District Collector, who is the competent authority to cancel the Caste Certificate, but in the present case, the loint Collector had cancelled the Caste Certificate without jurisdiction, by passing an ex-parte impugned order dated

26.12.1995 without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to put-forth petitioner's case, and therefore the consequential order dated 16.03.2006 issued by the 2nd respondent is il.legal and hence both the impugned orders of the 2nd respondent dated 26.12.1995 and 16.03.2006 need to be set aside.

8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in "Rampal vs. State of Haryana and others", repofted in (2009) 9 SCC 187 in particular paragraph Nos.5 and 6 very.clearly observed that it is admitted .position that before cancellation of the caste certificate of the appellant therein, the authorities ought to have given an opportunity of hearing to the appellant therein and rejecting the same is in clear violation of principles of natural justice. Paragraph Nos.5 and 6 of the said Apex Court ludgment are extracted hereunder:- 8 I n admi "5. We have heard the learned counsel for the part ies and examined the impugned order and other materials on record. In our view, the appeal i:; liable to be allowed and the impugned order slould also be set aside on a very short the can cellation of the caste certificate of t tIe-app eil a nt- the au horities ouoht to ave h qrven an oIlnft rtu nitvo t hearln tot he issued to hrm was a Scheduled Caste te" nd, therefo re, it can ot be Certifi cancelled. osition ha at th

6. In view of the fact that the principles of natural justice were admittedly violated in this case, the impugned order must be set aside and the Tahsildar concerned must be directed to decide the dispute regarding the caste certificate of the appellant' after giving hearing to the parties and after passing a reasoned order, preferably within three months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to him."

9. Learned Government Pleader for Social W<:lfare, appearing on trehalf of respondent No.1 placing reliance on the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of --7..' 9 respondent No.4 in the present W.P'No.16659 of. 2006 in particular paragraph No.3 contends that the petitioner is not entitled for relief as prayed for in the present W'P.No.16659 of 2006.

10. A bare perusal of the impugned order in Rc.No'BB- 7856/89 dated 26.1'2.1995, in particular paragraph No'5, clearly indicates that the order impugned had been passed without even receiving the response of the petitioner to the said show cause notice dated 28.09.1990, from the petitioner and without providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. A bare perusal of the order impugned cancelling the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner dated 26.12.t995 passed by the 2nd respondent, as borne on record, clearly indicates that the same is an ex-parte order, passed in clear violation of principles of natural justice and also coritrary to the view of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment reported in (2009) 9 SCC 187 in "Rampal Vs' State of Haryana and Others"' It is also borne on record that the authority, who passed the order is not a competent authority as indicated in Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes issue of ( t0 \ Community (lertificates Act, 1993, which is e>:tracted hereunder:- '5. Cancellation of the false. Community Certificate: ( 1.r Where, before or after the commencement of this Act a person not belonging to any of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes has obtained a false Commun ity Certificate to the effect that either himself or his children belongs to such Cast,:s, Tribes or Classes, either suo motu or on a written complaint by any person, call for the record and enquire into the correctn€rss of such certificate and if he is of the opinion that the certificate was obtained frauduler tly, he shall, by notification, cancel the certificato after giving the person concerned an oppoftun ty of making representation: Provided that where an enquiry into t 1e genuinen ess of a community certificate issued prior to the ccmmencement of this Act has commenced and is pending at such commencement, the record ther-eof :;hall be transferred by the concernr-.d authority to the District Collector and he shall continue [he enquiry and conclude the same und,er th is sub-section. 11 (2) The powers of the nature referred to in sub-section (1) may also be exercised by the Govern ment.

11. The interim Draver IntheD sent W.P.No.16 559 OO6 as souqht for bv the Det tioner is extracted ol 2 hereu nder: "It is also just and necessary that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to Suspend the impugned Proceedings in Rc.No.D3-4674/00 dated 16'3'2006 as well as the Proceedings in Rc'No.88/7856/89' dated 26.L2.L995 pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such other order or orders as may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case"' m r f, v ur 2 o o6 t t r e n t in st N -4 4 a P d .o8. P.M

15.3 Rc. o.B8/ 7As6l 9 dated 26.L .1995 oendino dis e above writ oetitio n. is in force asond ate. ( \ l2 L2. This court opines that the petitioner is entiHed for the relief as prayed for in W.p.No.16659 of 2O06, since the impugned order vide R.C.No.D3-4 674/OO dated 16.03.2OO6 of the respondent-No.2 is passed only on the basis of the proceedings vide Rc.No.Bg_ 7456/19A9 dated 26.12.1995 of the Joint Coilector, Khammam which is illegal and is passed by the 2^d respondent, without jurisdiction as per Section 5 .f the Telangana Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993, in clear viotation of principtes of natural justice.

13. TAKING INTO coNSI DE RATIO N: a). The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. b). The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Government pleader for Social Welfare, appearing on behatf of respondent No.1 and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behatf of respondent No.4. L l3 c)- The view of the Hon,ble Apex Court in the judgment reported in (2OO9) 9 SCC 1g7 in ..Rampal vs. State of Haryana and others,, (referred to and extracted above). d). The fact as impugned proceedings borne on record that the the 2"d respondent vide Rc.No.88-7856/ t9A9 26.12.L995 of the Joint Collector, Khammam ts admittedly not onty without Jurisdiction but also in clear violation of principles of natural justice. e). The fact as borne on record that the impugned Proceedings dated _16.03.2OO6 of the 2nd respondent is purely on the basis of the earlier ex parte impugned proceedings passed by the 2nr respondent dated 26.12.1995, and the same had been passed ih- clear violation of principles of natural justice, The writ petition is allowed and the order impugned vide proceedings in Rc.No.D3_4674tOO dated i6.03.2OO6 issued by the 2nd respondent as wefl as the proceedings in Rc.No.88 7A56/a9 dated

26.12.1995 issued by the 2nd respondent behind the I i I l I4 back of the petitioner are set aside. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shail stand closed. That Rule Nisi has been absolute as above. Witness the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice SUJOY PAUL, on this Thursday, the Sixth day of March, Two Thousand and Twenty five. \ To 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 o o SD/-P. PADMANABHA REDDY EEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER The Secretary to Government, Government ofAndhra Pradesh, Social Welfare Departrxent, Secretariat, Hyderabad. The District Collector, Khammam, District Khammam. The Mandal Reyenue Officer Bhadrachalam, Khammam Distrir:t. The Divisional flailway Manager, Personnel Branch, Hyderabad Division, South Central Ftailway, Secunderabad. Two CC's to G.l'] FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of l-elangana at Hyderabad (OLlT) Two CC's to G.l, FOR SOCIAL WELFARE, High Court for the State of Telangana at H,lderabad. (OUT) One CC to SRI .ALLIKA SURESH, Advocate[OPUC] One CC to SRI R.S.lvlURTHY, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SR.l (.ARVIND KUMAR, Advocate IOPUCI 1 A S BS

0.Two CD Copies s :.':::=!H*_-_ C.C. TODAY -I HL S 1,. r ,/(.' /:. 2 I APB 2025 'l ,t ',lr 't'..- ' .;, ..i ..,- ux, g 't' z ,9 HIGH COURT DATED:0610312025 ORDER WP.No.16659 of 2006 ALLOWING THE W,P WITHOUT GOSTS. @fq" 4