SRI P v. SUBRAHMANYA SARMA

in the affidavit fited in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to 'I .,/ // '/ suspend the impugned Proc. No. 8712921197, dated 3-2-200'1 of the 2nd respondent. l.A. NO: 2OF 2004(WPMP. NO: 14512 0F 20041 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affrdavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned G.O.Ms. No. 43, Social Welfare (CV.2) Department, dated 24-5-2004 of the 1st Respondent pending disposal of Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P. V. SUBRAHMANYA SARMA(NONE APPEARED) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 3: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER HONOURABLE SRI JT'STICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.11rt09 ot2OO4 ORDER: This writ petition is frled seeking the following prayer:- "...calling for tLe records of the respond.ents pertaining to Proceedings of the 2nd respondent issued in Proc.No.BT/2921/97 dated 03.02.2001 and the consequential G.O.Ms.No.43, Social Welfare (CV-2) Department, dated 24.05.2O04 of tlte 7st Respondent and ktaside the same by hnlding and declaring tLnt the petitioner who i.s Lambada Caste and Community is entitled to be treated as Schedule Tribe Lambada Communitg..."

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, none has appeared on behalf of the petitioner

3. The facts of the case in brief as stated are that the petitioner is working as Constable in Adilabad District and submits that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe (Lambada) Community and his date of birth is ort LO.O2.I974. Earlier he completed his high schooling in the year 1992. The Mandal Revenue Oflicer, Sarangpur issued Caste Certificate as well as residence certificate on 28.08.1993 stating that the petitioner belongs to Schedule Tribe. The Superintendent of Police, Adilabad has issued certihcate that the petitioner is working as Constable in the District Armed Reserved with P.C.No.2632 2 since 27 .11.1993. Therefore, it is evident from all the certificates that petitioner, his father and forefathers are natives of Adilabad District and belongs to Schedule Tribe (Lambada). 4 . Therea-fter, petitioner was asked to appear before the District Level Scrutiny Committee for enquiry regarding Schedule Caste Certihcate obtained by him. Accordingly, the petitioner appearecl before the Committee and hled school record of his brother and also submitted copies of pahalies and thereafter the District Collector, Adilabad District canceiled the caste certificate of the petitio ner uid,e proceedings dated 03.02.2001. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the appeal before the Government on 17 .O4.2O0 I and the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.43, Social Welfare Department dated 24.O5.2OO4 and upheld the cancellation orders issued by the District Collector, Adilabad on 03.02.20O1. euestioning the same, the present writ petition is f-rled. :

5. A counter aff,rdavit has been filed by respondent No.2 stating that in view of recommendation of District Level Scrutiny Committee and in exercise of the powers conferred under sub Rule (7) of Rule 9 of A.p (SC/ST/BC) Issuance of 3 Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certihcate Rules, 1995 and G.O.Ms.No.58 Social Welfare (J) Departmentdated

12.05.1997 read with Section 5(1) of A.P.SC/ST/BCs Regulation of Issuanceof Community Certil-rcates, the fraudulent caste certificate obtained by the writ petitioner SriRathodBhem Rao S/o.Chendru, AR Constable residing at Adilabad as Lambada (ST) the MRO, Sarangapur cancelled duly declaring that the individual does not belongs to ST Communit5r. Hence the orders issued by the District Collector dated 03.02.2001 in Re.No.87l2921 11997 canceling the fraudulent caste certificate is not arbitrary and the authorities having strictly followed the procedure and as per the Rule, the order was passed and as such the impugned order passed by the respondents are not in violation of the Rules. It is further submitted that, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment reported in 1997 SC Page No.2333 held to the effect that the hndings of the scrutiny committee cannot be interfered by the Court under ArLicle 226 of the Constitution of India. In view of the said judgment, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. I I 4

6. This Court <>n 2O.O9.2O04 has passed the following interim order in W.P.M.P.No.l45l2 of 2OO4: "In uieu of the suspension of impugned order duing the pendency ofappeal, th.e impugned proceedings has not been giuen effect, hence thereshall be inteim suspension." 7 . On a perusa-l of the record it can be seen that respondent authorities have issued G.O.Ms.No.43 upholding the cancellation orders issued by the District Collector. Thereafter, no reply has been liled and today when the matter is taken up for hearing, none has appeared for the petitioner. Since the respondent authorities have already passed orders on merits, the order in Proc.No.BT 12921 /97 dated 03.02.2O0 I passed by respondent No.2 and the consequential G.O.Ms.No.43, Social Wellare (CV 2) Department, dated 24.O5.2OO4 issued by respondent No.l u,arrants no interference. Accordingly, this rvrit petition stands dismissed. B. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. //TRUE COPY// S.MALLIKARJUNA RAO SISTANT REGISTRAR 1 SECTIoN OFFICER To,

1. One CC to Sri P. V. Subrahmanya Sarma, A 2 Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at cate [OPUC] Hyderabad [OUT] 3L) Two CC to The GP for Social Welfare, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad[OUTI 4 Trrun CFr Conioc HIGH COURT DATED:0410812025 ORDER I I ,I ".* o o .L * Ro( HT s T4 I uAc \ 18 l'lA8 ? t]26 ( I (, WP.No.11409 of 2004 S PArcri(-- DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS )P 'I