S. B. SINHA, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS writ appeal is directed against the order dated 16-7-2001 passed in WP No. 4824 of 1995 by the learned single Judge in dismissing the writ petition filed seeking to quash the impugned order RC No. 9934/1992/tw, dated 25-2-1995, whereunder the social status certificate issued in favour of the appellant herein as Scheduled Tribe has been cancelled by the 1st respondent.

( 2 ) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant would contend that though the social status certificate was issued prior to the Andhra pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short, the Act ) coming into force, as per section 21 of the Act, any certificate issued prior to the Act coming into force is deemed to have been issued under the provisions of the Act, as such the procedure contemplated under the Act has to be followed for cancellation of the certificate. It appears the Act came into force with effect from 16-5-1997 whereas the impugned order has been passed on 25-2-1995. According to the learned Counsel the impugned order is passed basing upon the report of the Mandal Revenue Officer, wherein the purported admission of the appellant was recorded. It is contended that though before the Mandal Revenue Officer the appellant had admitted that he belongs to "koppala Velama caste which comes under BC d , but the fact that he refused to sign on the statement would categorically go to show that no such admission was made in such a situation. It is well-settled principles of law that as per Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, facts admitted need not be proved. Furthermore, this plea was not taken before the learned single judge. The learned single Judge upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case held thus:"the question is whether any inquiry was conducted in this regard and opportunity was given to the petitioner to put forth his claim, keeping in view the principles of natural justice. Admittedly a show-cause notice was given to the petitioner and he submitted representations twice and it is seen from the proceedings that the petitioner himself gave a statement before the first respondent to the effect that he did not belong to yanadula caste; he belonged to koppula velama caste and that he produced yanadula caste certificate on the advice of some other persons to get employment in LIC. In view of this categorical submission, even though the petitioner resiled from his earlier statement that he did not give such a statement before the first respondent, I am not prepared to accept the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the matter may be remanded to the first respondent for fresh inquiry stating that the principles of natural justice have not been complied with as the copies of the documents requested by him have not been furnished. It is a bald and vague statement that is mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and also in the explanation. It is submitted that when the documents are sought to be furnished it is incumbent on the part of the petitioner to explain the relevancy of the documents. In the absence of such relevancy, rejecting to furnish the copies of the documents cannot be said to be in violation of the principles of natural justice. This contention also cannot be accepted for the reason that the details of the documents and their relevancy for the purpose of the case have not been mentioned. I am not persuaded to accept this contention, inasmuch as there is compliance of principles of natural justice and also Section 5 of the Act. Under these circumstances, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. "

( 3 ) THE Apex Court in Director of tribal Welfare Government of A. P. v. Laveti girl AIR 1995 SC 1506, has categorically held that when once the social status certificate is cancelled,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document