( 1 ) THIS Writ Appeal Is preferred by the respondents in the writ petition against the judgment of the learned single judge allowing the writ petition filed by respondents 1 and 2. The learned single judge has directed the appellants herein to issue a certificate showing that the 1st petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Tribe for the purpose of admissison to Engineering Colleges in the State. For the sake of convenience we shall refer to the parties as they are arrayed In the writ petition.

( 2 ) THE two petitioners, Gundla vankateswara Rao and Gundla Prabhakar together with their father, Dyvadeenam. constitute a Hindu joint family. They are residents of Pinapaka village within the Taluk of Burgampahad in Khammam district. The said village is situated within a scheduled area declared under the Scheduled Areas (Part-B States) order, 1950, issued by the President of india under paragraph 6 (1) of fifth- schedule to the Constitution. They belong to "goud" community.

( 3 ) THE Rules relating to admission to engineering Colleges in the State reserve 6% of the seats in favour of member of Scheduled Tribes. Scheduled tribes are described as those that are mentioned in the Constitution (Scheduled tribes) Order, 1950, issued by the president of India under Art 342 of the constitution. An Applicant belonging to a Scheduled Tribe is required to enclose a certificate from the Tahsildar concerned certifying the said fact.

( 4 ) CLAIMING that "goud community is a scheduled tribe within the meaning of the Scheduled Tribes Order, 1950, the 2nd petitioner applied to the tahsiidar. Burgampahad to issue a certificate describing him as a member of the Scheduled tribe, Goud". This was refused by the Tahsiidar by his memo, dated 12-11-81 on the ground that the Goud caste to which the 2nd petitioner belongs is not a schedtiledtribe. The Tahsildars opinion was evidently based upon G 0 Ms. No 447, medical and Health, dated 10-7-79, in which the following guideline occurs under the heading " (4) Goudu: (in the agency tracts)":- "this is a district Tribunal community inhabiting scheduled areas of visakhapatnam and Srikakulam districts whose traditional occupation is cattlerearing, this is neither related to the non-tribal community of Goud, Gouda. Goudu, Goundla. Gamalla, or Goundla vandlu whose traditional occupation is toddy tapping and liquor vending, nor to the other non-tribal community of goud which is a sub-caste among Kayasthas scheduled Tribe Certificates should not be issued for any person belonging to the non-tribal community of the plains. On a representation made by the petitioner s father, the District Collector, khammam, while re-affirming the legal position directed him to approach the tahsiidar again and produce evidence in support of his claim. Accordingly, the petitioners father approached the Tahsiidar and produced evidence; but by his endorsement dated 21-2-1982, the tahsildar again refused to certify that the 2nd petitioner belongs to a Scheduled tribe. Aggrieved by the said refusal the 2nd petitioner filed W P No. 794/1983 in this Court, which is said to be pending. On similar grounds the Tahsiidar refused to issue a similar certificate in favour of the 1st petitioner as well, whereupon the writ petition from which this writ Appeal arises, v/as filed The contention of the petitioners is that the goud community is declared to be a scheduled Tribe in the Presidential Order, 1950. and that it is not open to the State government to issue any instructions or order contrary thereto. It is not competent for the State Government and its officers, it is contended, to enquire into the question whether the goud community mentioned in the Presidential Order is only that distinct tribal communityinhabiting the agency-tracts of Visakhapatnam and srikakulam districts whose traditional occupation is cattle-rearing, or to say that the non-tribal community of goud whose traditional occupation is toddy-tapping and liquor-ven