( 1 ) THE Writ Petition and the Writ Appeal are interrelated and therefore it is convenient to dispose of them by this common order. The appellant in the Writ Appeal and the petitioner in the Writ Petition are the same. The parties will be referred to as per their status in the Writ Petition.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case are as follows: the petitioner claims to belong to Scheduled tribe (ST) community. He secured admission during the academic year 1992-93 in first year M. B. B. S as per the Rules and regulations of the University of Health sciences, the fourth respondent. At the time of admission the authorities asked the petitioner to produce community certificate from the first respondent and his admission was kept in abeyance. Therefore the petitioner filed a Writ Petition before this court. The Writ Petition being W. P. No. 9768 of 1993 was allowed by order dt. 4-10-1993 directing the respondents to permit petitioner to attend the classes. This Court further directed the first respondent to complete the enquiry within one month from the date of receipt of the order. In obedience thereto, the petitioner was permitted to attend the classes. However, he was denied scholarship and other facilities and he was not allotted the seat with class-fellows. Therefore, he filed another Writ Petition being w. P. No. 15657 of 1994 praying for a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to treat him on par with the regular students and also declare the proceedings of the first respondent in ordering successive enquiries with regard to status of the petitioner as null and void. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 9-4-2001. Feeling aggrieved by the same writ Appeal No. 1025 of 2001 is filed.

( 3 ) IT appears that while W. P. No. 15657 of 1994 was pending, in the counter-affidavit filed there it was revealed that the first respondent by proceedings in Rc. No. 2846/ 93/tri/vc- 1 passed in October 1994 (hereinafter called the impugned proceedings ) cancelled the community certificate of the petitioner. It is also stated that the same was served on the petitioner on 6-4-2001. Challenging the said proceedings of cancellation of the community certificate, the petitioner filed W. P. No. 12468 of 2001 praying for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the said proceedings as arbitrary, unjust, null and void and for a consequential direction to respondents to admit the petitioner to prosecute M. B. B. S. course and House surgency on par with regular candidates.

( 4 ) IN the counter-affidavit filed in w. P. NO. 15657 of 1994 on behalf of the first respondent it is contended that father of the petitioner Sri J. N. Sita Rama Raju is a revenue employee and that in his Service register his caste is recorded as oriya kshtriya . However, he secured another certificate showing kondadora caste on 26-8-1979. On the strength of the said certificate the entries in the Service Register were also changed in 1985. Oriya Kshtriya and Kondadora castes are not synonymous to each other and fraudulently changes were made in the Service Register of the petitioner s father. In G. O. Ms. No. 1793 dt. 23-9-1970 which notified STs, kondadora is not notified in the list. Tahsildar of Salur issued the community certificate even without verifying the same duly violating various instructions issued by the Government. Oriya Kshtriya is not a ST in Andhra Pradesh. The certificate dt. 16-4-1990 issued to the petitioner is therefore invalid. During the course of admission to M. B. B. S. course the University of Health Sciences was requested not to admit the petitioner under reserved quota until enquiry report is received by them. The petitioner s claim is fraudulent claim.

( 5 ) NO counter-affidavit is filed in w. P. No. 12468 of 2001. However, the learned Government Pleader for Social welfare has produced the records relating to impugned order and made his submissions.

( 6 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner sri Rajasekhar submits th