Putteti Santhan Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI Writ Petition No.19492 of 2020

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the 4^th respondent to issue S.C.(Samban) caste certificate pursuant to the application dated 17.09.2020, to enable the petitioner to join in Indian Institute of Technology, Madras.

¶4

The case of the petitioner is that, he belongs to Scheduled Caste Community of Samban, which is notified in Schedule Caste Order, 1950 at Serial No.55; he made an application through A.P.Online on 15.09.2020 for issuance of caste certificate along with all required documents of proof; even though the petitioner made an application in accordance with Rule 4, till date, the caste certificate is not issued. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶5

Along with the writ petition, petitioner filed I.A.No.1 of 2020 seeking a direction to the 4^th respondent–Tahsildar to consider the representation dated 19.09.2020 to issue a caste certificate. This Court allowed the said I.A, directing respondent Nos.3 and 4 to issue provisional SC (Samban) caste certificate to the writ petitioner in terms of Rule 19 of Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes - Issue of Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificates Rules, 1997,(for short ‘the Rules’) to enable the petitioner to get admission into the College, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶6

2

¶7

Rule 19 of AP (SC, ST & BCs) Regulation of Issue of Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificate Rules, 1997, (for short ‘Rules’) deals with provisional

¶8

admission/appointment. The said rule reads as follows:

¶9

“Rule 19: If the last date for admission to an educational institution/appointment to an office/post is getting expired, and there is delay in finalizing the enquiry and issuing of Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificate by the Competent Authority. Then the Competent Authority may inform the Principal of that educational institution/appointing authority/employer or such other authority, competent in this behalf, to admit/appoint the candidate, on the basis of the declaration given by the candidate/parent/guardian before the Competent Authority, while applying in Form I/II as per Rule 5, for the issuance of the Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificate. Such admission of appointment shall only be provisional and valid for three months from the date of the communication by the Competent Authority to the Principal/employer/appointing authority as the case may be, and shall cease to be valid after the issuance of the Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificate by the Competent Authority, based on the conclusion of the enquiry”.

¶10

Pursuant to the direction in I.A.No.1 of 2020, the

¶11

provisional caste certificate has been granted to the petitioner even though the same is not contemplated in accordance with Rule 19 of the said Rules. Either the Act or the Rules do not contemplate issuance of provisional caste certificate.

¶12

Counter affidavit is filed by the 4^th respondent stating inter alia that the father of the writ petitioner filed an application before the 4^th respondent seeking issuance of the caste certificate to the writ petitioner; the Revenue Divisional Officer vide Rc.G.1466/2020, dated 16.10.2020, returned the proposal submitted by the 4^th respondent, Tahsildar and informed that the Government has appointed One Man Commission to examine issuance of ‘Samban’ SC Caste Certificate in all districts of Andhra Pradesh State and the same was informed to the father of the writ petitioner through office endorsement dated 22.10.2020; Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Caste Welfare Association, filed W.P.No.19125 of

¶13

3

¶14

2008 before this Court and an interim direction was granted as follows:

¶15

“Till further orders, no certificate giving status of Scheduled Caste shall be issued to Sambani Kapu caste people”.

¶16

The said writ petition is still pending.

¶17

Additional counter affidavit is filed by the 4^th respondent on 09.02.2021 stating that the Revenue Divisional Officer addressed a letter dated 22.01.2021 to the District Collector, Nellore seeking cancellation of the caste certificate issued in favour of the father of the writ petitioner and it is under process; the District Collector has issued Form VI notice to the father of the writ petitioner on 18.02.2021 as per Act No.16 of 1993 and G.O.Ms.No.58, Social Welfare (J2) Department, dated 12.05.1997 to enquire into the matter; as per the recommendations of One Man Commission appointed on certain issues of SCs & STs headed by Sri J.C.Sharma, IAS(Retd.) on measures to control problem of false caste certificates, Chapter IX-Recommendations in Para 9.5, reads as follows:

¶18

“(i)to delete two castes, that is Samban (57) and Madari Kuruva, Madari Kuruva (31) as these castes were not found existing in the State as per the ethnographic studies and large scale misuse of these castes by nonSC Communities having some similarities in name.

¶19

(ii) to delete fourteen (14) castes which are not found existing as per the filed reports from the District Collectors. [Samban Community was also found non-existent but it has been covered under sub-para (i) above]”.

¶20

The petitioner can avail alternate remedy to file an appeal

¶21

under Section 7(1) r/w Rule 10 of the Act, before the Competent Authority challenging the said endorsement; this Court in W.P.No.21353 of 2011 and batch dated 27.02.2012 and W.P.No.18807 of 2008, dated 08.07.2013, directed to take

¶22

4

¶23

appropriate steps, if so advised, for cancelling the community certificates with regard to Budaga Jangam (S.C) community.

¶24

After additional counter affidavit is filed, the petitioner filed an I.A.No.1 of 2021 seeking to amend the prayer in the writ petition, challenging the said endorsement dated 22.10.2020. The said endorsement reads as follows:

¶25

“It is to inform that, on representation filed by Sri P.Syam Prasa for issuance of SC (Samba) Caste Certificate to his son P.Santhan, conducted enquiry and a detail report has been submitted to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nellore in the reference 3^rd cited. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nellore in the reference 4^th cited, informed that it is not possible to issue SC (Samban) Caste Certificate as this issue of SC (Samban) Caste Certificate pending consideration by the Government”.

¶26

In the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.1 of 2021, it is stated that while issuing the endorsement, the principles of natural justice were violated and no notice and opportunity was given to the petitioner as contemplated under Rules 4 and 5 of the said Act.

¶27

Rule 4 of the said Rules of 1997 deal with the procedure for issuance of caste certificate. According to Rule 4, an application has to be submitted in the prescribed Form I/II to the Competent Authority well in advance i.e., six (6) months before seeking admission to the educational institutions and if the applicant is a minor, the parent/guardian has to submit the application form.

¶28

Rule 5 deals with procedure for verification. Sub-Rule a, b and c reads as follows:

¶29

Rule 5:a) On receipt of the application, the Competent Authority or any officer authorized by him in this regard shall ensure that the applicant has furnished complete information in all the columns of Form I/II and, shall then give the acknowledgment slip as appended to Form I/II, in token of having received the application. The Competent Authority shall then verify the information/documents/evidence furnished by the applicant/parent/guardian

¶30

5

¶31

in Form I/Ii. If the Competent Authority is satisfied with the correctness of the information/documents/evidence furnished by the applicant/parent/guardian, he shall issue the Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificates in Form III within 30 (thirty) days of the receipt of the application in Form I/II. The Competent Authority shall specify in Form III the sub-caste of the SC claimant and the sub-tribe/sub-group of the ST claimant assisted out in Annexure-I appended to these rules.

¶32

b) If the Competent Authority feels that further enquiry is necessary, he shall then examine the school records, birth registration certificate, if any, and also examine the parent/guardian or applicant, in relation to his/her/their community. He may examine any other person who has the knowledge of the social status of the applicant/parent/guardian, as the case may be. He shall take into account, in the case of Scheduled Tribes, their anthropological and ethnological traits, deity, rituals, customs, mode of marriage, death ceremonies/method of burial of dead bodies etc., before issuing the Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificates. The Competent Authority shall have power to call for further information and/or collect such evidence/document and also conduct such enquiry as specified in the Form-IV, if deemed necessary. Notice in Form IV should be issued to the parent/guardian, in case the applicant is a minor, to appear before the Competent Authority.

¶33

c) The notice as specified in Form IV should give clear 15 (fifteen) days from the date of the receipt of the notice by the parent/applicant/guardian, to attend the enquiry. In no case, not more than 30 (thirty) days from the date of the receipt of the notice, should be allowed.

¶34

As seen from the said rule, if the applicant is a minor, notice in form IV should be issued to the parent/guardian and according to Clause (c) of rule 5, 15 days notice has to be given in Form IV to the parent/guardian to attend the enquiry. If the person on whom the notice is served fails to respond on the date mentioned therein, the Competent Authority may reject or confirm the claim based on the documents available with the Competent Authority. According to Clause (a), the Competent Authority should give reasonable opportunity to produce evidence in support of their claim. The Competent Authority shall confirm or reject the claim as per Rule 5(i) and in the case of doubtful claims, shall refer the matter to the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee formed at District level under Rule 8 i.e., Joint Collector of the District, for the recommendations of the Committee, with regard to the issue of the Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificate. On receipt of the

¶35

6

¶36

recommendations of the Scrutiny Committee, the Competent Authority shall accordingly confirm or reject the claims of the applicants.

¶37

Rule 10 deals with the appeal which reads as follows:

¶38

“ An appeal shall lie to the District Collector within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of rejection orders on the application for community, nativity and date of birth certificate passed by the Competent Authority. The appellate authority shall examine the grounds on which the appeal is filed and also receive or call for further evidence documents if considered necessary, and pass such orders as the appellate authority considers fit and proper in the matter. In case of Bariki Caste, the appeal shall lie to the Government against the orders of the District Collector”.

¶39

Rule 11 deals with Review, which reads as follows:

¶40

(1) The Government may, on an application filed by any person aggrieved by an order passed by the District Collector under subsection (1) of Section 5 of the Act, within 30 (thirty) days of receipt of that order, review such order if it was passed by the District Collector under any mistake, whether of fact or law or in ignorance of any material fact.

¶41

(2) Pending disposal of an appeal under Rule 10 or a review under Rule 11(1) above, it shall be competent for the Government to stay the operation of the order against which an appeal or review, as the case may be, is filed.

¶42

Rule 12 deals with Revision, which reads as follows:

¶43

“The Government either suo motu, or on an application filed by any person aggrieved by the orders issued by the authority authorized under these rules, shall entertain such application as a revision petition, within sixty (60) days of the communication of the order passed under these Rules and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 8 of the Act 16 of 1993.”

¶44

As seen from the endorsement dated 22.10.2020, it

¶45

appears that an enquiry was conducted and report has been submitted to the Revenue Divisional Officer.

¶46

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is

¶47

that no notice is given to the father of the petitioner and no opportunity was given to him to produce relevant documents.

¶48

7

¶49

Learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner did not even file an application in accordance with Form I of the Rules.

¶50

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that online application has been made and in the said online application, Form I was also filled by the petitioner.

¶51

Learned Government Pleader also submits that in similar circumstances, W.P.No.4992 of 2021 was filed and this Court disposed of the same directing to issue fresh notice to the petitioner to participate in the enquiry and to take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶52

In view of the facts and circumstances, as the impugned endorsement is not a speaking order and does not give any details with regard to the notice issued by the respondent with regard to enquiry that was conducted, the impugned endorsement dated 22.10.2020 is set aside and the Competent Authority is directed to issue fresh notice to the petitioner’s father or the petitioner, complete the enquiry and take appropriate decision in the matter.

¶53

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶54

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶55

_________________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J

¶56

Dt: 13.07.2021 VSL

¶57

8

¶58

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶59

WRIT PETITION No.19492 OF 2018

¶60

Date: 13.07.2021

¶61

VSL

¶62

9

Putteti Santhan v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Putteti Santhan v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A Jagadeeswari Vs P Usha Kumari

P. Lakshmi Narasamma Vs N Radha Reddy

Naveen Kumar Sahu, Vs The state of A.P

M/sMADHAVI Traders Vs the State of Ap

Moturi Nageswara Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Cheedipalli Chinatutayya, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh