Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Judgment
Between: Smt. Mooda Sujatha W/o. Mooda Praveen Kumar H.No.10-9-330, Road No.1, Sainagar, Nizamabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Nizamabad District, Nizamabad. 2 The Tahsildar (Mandal Revenue Officer), Nizamabad Mandal, Nizamabad District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings bearing A2/46893/2006 dated 21.11.2006 of the Respondent No.2 as illegal, arbitrary, void, ab-initio, unconstiutional and violative of Articles 14 & 19 of the Constitution of India, and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SERLA PANDARI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : ORDER This writ petition has been filed by Mooda Sujatha with a prayer to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the letter No.A2/46893/2006 dated 21.11.2006 addressed by the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar (Mandal Revenue Officer), to the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Nizamabad, as arbitrary and illegal.
The petitioner claims that she belongs to SC community. Her marriage was solemnized on 25.12.2005 with one Mooda Praveen Kumar, resident of Anandnagar, Nizamabad. Her marital life run in rough weather and consequently, she presented a complaint before the Station House Officer, Nizamabad. Thereupon, the Station House Officer registered a case in Cr.No.129 of 2006 under Section 498-A IPC, Sections 4 and 5 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and also under Section 3 (i) (x) of SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1980. While so, the 2nd respondent addressed a letter to the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Nizamabad, informing that the petitioner belongs to Padmasali Caste. The said letter is under challenge in this writ petition. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that without hearing the petitioner, the 2nd respondent addressed the said letter and therefore, the same is required to be set aside.
Operative part
The petitioner seeks her social status to be declared that she belongs to SC community. There is a procedure prescribed under the Andhra Pradesh (SC, ST & BCs) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’) and she has to make an application to the competent authority for issuance of certificate declaring her social status. The petitioner is at liberty to make an application before the competent authority invoking the provisions of the Act for issuance of caste certificate. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. __________ 10-07-2008
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 14, 19, 226; Indian Penal Code, 1860; Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — ss. 4, 5; SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1980 — s. 3(i)(x); Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993.
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.