Writ Petition No. 5459 of 2010 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that: -
Provisions considered
Judgment
The petitioners are children of late Subbaraju, out of them, petitioner No.1 is working as Extension Officer in Panchayat Raj Division and petitioners 2 to 5 are said to be agriculturists. All of them were issued caste certificates to the effect that they belong to Kondareddy community. Petitioner No.1 secured appointment against a vacancy earmarked for Scheduled Tribes on the basis of the caste certificate issued to him. On the basis of the complaint submitted by respondent No.6 alleging that the petitioners do not belong to Scheduled Tribes, the Collector and District Magistrate, East Godavari District, Kakinada, respondent No.2 herein, initiated proceedings under Section 5 of the A.P. (SC, ST and BCs) Regulation of issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’) and the Rules made thereunder against the petitioners. An enquiry was conducted by the District Level Scrutiny Committee and after taking the same into account and on considering the explanation submitted by the petitioners, respondent No.2 passed an order, dated 13.02.2010, directing cancellation of the caste certificates issued to the petitioners. The petitioners filed an appeal before respondent No.1 together with an application for stay. Their grievance is that respondent No.1 has not passed any orders on the application for stay so far and in the meanwhile steps are being initiated for termination of the services of petitioner No.1. Heard learned counsel the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare for respondents 1 to 5
Operative part
and learned counsel for respondent No.6. The Act mandates that till the caste certificate issued to an individual is cancelled, he shall be entitled to reap the benefits thereof. Proceedings were initiated against the petitioners under Section 5 of the Act and caste certificates issued in their favour were cancelled. The petitioners have availed the statutory remedy of appeal. The interests of the petitioners need to be protected during the pendency of such an appeal though no further benefits that are meant for Scheduled Tribes can be extended to the petitioners. Their present position, be it as to employment or otherwise, cannot be disturbed till the appeal is decided. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that: - (a) respondent No.1 shall endeavor to dispose of the appeal presented by the petitioners against the order, dated
13.02.2010, passed by respondent No.2, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; (b) pending the appeal, no proceedings shall be initiated against the petitioners on the strength of the impugned order denying them the status which is already held by them. However, the petitioners shall not be entitled to be extended further benefits such as appointment, promotion or allotment of lands, etc. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY 22nd April 2010 Note: Issue CC by tomorrow. B/o
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that: -
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Community Certificates Act, 1993.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 22 Apr 2010. The bench was L NARASIMHA REDDY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.