Petitioners withdrew the writ petition seeking relief against community certificates issued to Respondents 4 and 5, seeking liberty to approach the competent authority under the Act if their claim of imposter status is established.
Writ petition disposed of as not pressed; liberty granted to approach competent authority under Section 5 of the Act.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
Writ Petition No.9740 of 2016
Date:30.3.2016
Between: Gedam Swathi, Tatiguda, Adilabad and another.
…..Petitioners
And The Registrar (Recruitment) High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, For the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and others.
… Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
Writ Petition No.9740 of 2016
PC:(Per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
Mr. J. Satya Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners does not press the writ petition at this stage and seeks liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent authority under Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’) for seeking appropriate declaration and/or cancellation of Community/Caste Certificate issued in favour of respondent Nos. 4 and 5. He further submits that if the petitioners succeed before the competent authority in establishing that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 do not belong to Scheduled Tribe, as claimed by them, the petitioners may be given liberty to file fresh petition for appropriate remedy.
The writ petition is disposed of as not pressed with liberty as prayed. It is open to the petitioners to approach this Court afresh, if they succeed before the competent authority in establishing that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 do not belong to Scheduled Tribe. It is needless to mention that if the petitioners approach the competent authority, as aforementioned, under Section 5 of the Act, the competent authority shall deal with
their application only after issuing notice and giving an opportunity of being heard to respondent Nos. 4 and 5. All contentions on merits are kept open.
Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications shall also stand closed.
____________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ
__________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J 30th March, 2016 Pnb
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition regarding the community certificate of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 shall be allowed or disposed of, keeping merit open.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gedam Swathi and another
Registrar (Recruitment) High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, For the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh
DILIP B. BHOSALE
P. NAVEEN RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
