Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : G.YETHIRAJULU
Nimmaka Jaya Raju - Appellant
Versus
Satrucharla Vijaya Rama Raju - Respondent
Decided On : 01-30-04
Representation of the People Act –Sections 5,100 (1) (d) (i) –Constitution of India –Articles 332, 342, 366 –A. P. (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 –Issue on Caste Certificate, Election Petition–The petitioner contended that the first respondent has been obtaining the social status certificates for all the elections subsequent to 1983 to the concerned authorities and impressing upon them that he was declared by the Court as konda dora –This Court in C. Election Petition already held that there is no bar for this Court to consider the question whether the first respondent belongs to Konda Dora Tribe on the strength of the material placed by both parties –The petitioner contended that the caste certificate issued by the R. D. O. is not a valid one, as it was issued without conducting any enquiry about the genuineness or otherwise of the caste of the first respondent and given under the threat and coercion of the first respondent – The learned Counsel for the petitioner represented that as the registered documents and School Records are public documents, the entries in those documents could be safely relied on to know the caste of the Respondents family –Held, In the light of the above findings, court wish to sum up the factors that led this Court to come to a conclusion that the first respondent does not belong to Konda Dora tribe –The geniological tree of the family of r. 1 not furnished describing the castes of his ancestors on paternal and maternal side –The place of birth of the ancestors of R. 1 not mentioned –The birth certificates of any of the family members not produced –No material placed to prove that the family of R. 1 suffered any indignation or humiliation in the hands of the society or upper castes –No documentary evidence placed by R. 1 to prove that he belongs to konda Dora Tribe –The files relating to issuing of Caste certificates of R. 1- for earlier elections not summoned –Konda Raju cannot be equated with konda Dora Tribe–The file produced by the Revenue divisional Officer, discloses that they were issuing the Caste Certificate on the basis of the Judgment of the high Court without conducting any independent enquiry before issuance of the same – Important customs of R. 1s family are distinct from the customs of other Konda Doras –Marriage alliances of R. 1s family with other communities like Muka dora, Manne Dora, Brahmins etc –Election Petition allowed
( 1 ) INTRODUCTION: this election petition is filed under section 5,100 (1) (d) (i) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 ( the Act for brevity) by an unsuccessful candidate of the legislative Assembly Elections, 1999 to declare the election of the first respondent as member of the Legislative Assembly from 8 naguru (Schedule Tribe) Assembly constituency as void, to set aside the same and to declare him as duly elected to the said Assembly constituency. PLEADINGS:
( 2 ) THE averments of the petition are briefly as follows:
( 3 ) THE petitioner belongs to Jatapu tribe, which is included in the list of Scheduled tribe (STs ). The election to the 8 Naguru (ST) Legislative Assembly Constituency was held on 11-9-1999. It is a reserved constituency for Scheduled Tribes. In the said election, the petitioner and the first respondent contested as Telugu Desam party (TOP) and Congress-l Party candidates. The respondents 2 to 4 contested from other parties. The first respondent was declared elected on 6-10-1999. He does not belong to any of the scheduled Tribes mentioned in the scheduled Tribes Order, 1976 relating to andhra Pradesh. He belongs to kshatriya caste. He is claiming as kondaraju1 and obtained false certificate of social status as konda Dora claiming that kondaraju and konda Dora are synonymous. The records pertaining to the family of the first respondent reveal that they belong to kshatriya caste, but not to Scheduled Tribe. With the help of the judgment of the High court in E. P. No. 13 of 1983 he obtained a certificate of social status as Scheduled tribe and is getting elected to Lok Sabha as well as Legislative Assembly. The petitioner came to know that the Government of andhra Pradesh issued Memo No. 7725/ cv2/99 dated 10-6-1999 directing the Collector, Vizianagaram to initiate action against the first respondent in respect of the certificate of social status and it is pending enquiry. Since the first respondent does not belong to any of the Tribes specified in the Schedule under Article 342 of the Constitution of India, he is not entitled to be a candidate from 8 Naguru (ST) Legislative Assembly Constituency and his nomination was improperly accepted. The Courts have no power to declare a synonymous of a Tribe to be of a Tribe, which is not included in the list of Scheduled Tribes under Article 342 by the President of India. The judgment of this Court in E. P. No. 13 of 1983 is null and void and cannot be looked into. The first respondent cannot be allowed to obtain a certificate of social status basing on a void judgment. The first respondent played fraud on the Constitution of India and deceived the voters of 8 Naguru (ST) Constituency knowing fully well that he does not belong to Scheduled Tribe. He gave an impression to the people that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe and propagated to that effect. He is playing this game since 20 years and was duping the voters of 8 Naguru (ST) Assembly and Parvathipuram Parliamentary Constituencies. The first respondent by deception got his name accepted by the third respondent and succeeded in the election. Hence the petition.
( 4 ) THE first respondent resisted the petition through his written statement with the following averments in brief.
( 5 ) THE first respondent, his forefathers and ancestors belong to konda Dora Tribe. They never claimed that they belong to kondaraju or that Kondaraju is synonymous to konda Dora tribe. The ancestors of the first respondent used to describe themselves as kshatriyas as they belong to Hill Zamindari family of Merangi. The first respondent and his forefathers were continuously elected since 1967 for State legislature and Parliament as konda Dora a notified Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner is playing fraud on the Court by contending that the first respondent does not belong konda dora Tribe. The community certificates issued to the first respondent cannot be cancelled without appropriate enquiry a
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
