Allowed

Maddala Veerraju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Sept 2026WP/18416/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a ZPTC member from the Konda Kapu community, challenged proceedings by the Andhra Pradesh State Commission for Scheduled Tribes initiating a suo motu enquiry into his Scheduled Tribe status. The Commission admitted that adjudication of community certificates falls exclusively within the domain of the District Level Scrutiny Committee and District Collector under the 1993 Act. The High Court held that the Commission lacks inherent powers to conduct an independent enquiry when the statute provides a specific enquiry and appeal mechanism, and set aside the impugned proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Impugned proceedings dated 30.06.2026 set aside; writ petition disposed of with liberty to petitioner to take appropriate steps before the District Collector and avail remedies against further orders.

Maddala Veerraju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

HN, J

W.P.No.18416_2026

APHC010346322026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶6

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶7

[3457]

¶8

THURSDAY, THE 17^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶9

PRESENT

¶10

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶11

WRIT PETITION NO: 18416/2026

¶12

Between:

¶13

MADDALA VEERRAJU, S/O.LATE VENKATA PADMANABHARAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O.KIMMURU VILLAGE, ADDATEGALA MANDAL, POLAVARAM DISTRICT.

¶14

...PETITIONER

¶15

AND

¶16

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AT AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238.

¶17

ANDHRA PRADESH STATE COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULE TRIBES, REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT-520010.

¶18

THE SECRETARY, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULE TRIBES, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT-520010.

¶19

THE COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, POLAVARAM DISTRICT AT RAMPACHODAVARAM-533288.

¶20

THE PROJECT OFFICER, ITDA AND CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT LEVEL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE (DLSC,STS), RAMPACHODAVARAM, POLAVARAM DISTRICT-533288.

¶21

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶22

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS, or other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the proceedings in Lr.No.2551/DEO2/

HN, J

W.P.No.18416_2026

PLVR-Grvns-suo motu/2026 dated 30-06- 2026 issued by the 3rd respondent herein, whereby the Andhra Pradesh State Commission for Scheduled Tribes has taken suo- motu cognizance and proposing to conduct an independent enquiry/Gram Sabha on 10-07-2026 into the petitioner's Scheduled Tribe (Konda Kapu) community status as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 and the Rules made thereunder, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently to set aside same and pass

¶27

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the proceedings in Lr.No.2551/DEO2/ PLVR-Grvns-suo motu/2026 dated 30-06-2026 issued by the 3rd respondent herein, including the conduct of the Grama Sabha scheduled on 10-07-2026 or on any other subsequent date, pending disposal of the writ petition and pas

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶30

1.P DURGA PRASAD

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶32

1.JAYA PRAKASH MADASU

¶33

2.GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

HN, J

W.P.No.18416_2026

ORDER:

The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned proceedings dated 30.06.2026, whereby respondent No.2 has taken up the matter suo motu and proposed to conduct an enquiry into the community status of the petitioner.

¶39

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner belongs to the Konda Kapu community, which is considered as a Scheduled Tribe community in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner was elected as a ZPTC Member for Addateegala Village, which is related for Scheduled Tribes. It is further submitted that the petitioner and his ancestors have been residing in Scheduled Area for the past 150 years. The respondent No.2 appears to have taken cognizance of a complaint made by a third party who is opposing the petitioner on the political front, and accordingly issued the impugned proceedings proposing to conduct a suo motu enquiry into the community status of the petitioner.

¶40

It is submitted that the District Collector is the competent authority to conduct an enquiry into the community status of an individual. The District Level Scrutiny Committee is required to conduct a proper enquiry before ascertaining the community status of any individual.

¶41

The respondent No.2 has also filed a counter-affidavit, wherein it is admitted that the adjudication of community certificates falls within the exclusive domain of the District Level Scrutiny Committee and that the final authority in that regard is the District Collector.

HN, J

W.P.No.18416_2026

The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the issue is presently before the District Level Scrutiny Committee and that an enquiry is pending before the District Collector pursuant to the submission of the report by the District Level Scrutiny Committee.

¶46

Recording the submissions, the present writ petition is disposed off, leaving it open for the petitioner to take appropriate steps as advised and, if aggrieved, to avail the appropriate remedy against the further orders passed by respondent No.4.

¶47

The impugned proceedings are hereby set aside, as respondent No.2 does not have inherent powers to conduct any independent enquiry when the statute provides for the conduct of an enquiry and the remedy of appeal before the appellate authority as per the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and backward Classes Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993.

¶48

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed off. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶49

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶50

___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶51

Date:17.09.2026 NKA

HN, J

W.P.No.18416_2026

Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No 30

¶56

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶57

WRIT PETITION NO: 18416 of 2026

¶58

Date: 17.09.2026

¶59

NKA

Maddala Veerraju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maddala Veerraju 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