Back
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
Sangepu Premala, Adilabad Dist. – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of A. P. – Respondent
ORDER :
Petitioner, a resident of Ichoda Village in Adilabad District and claims to be belonging to ST-Community (Naikpod), applied for position of School Assistant (Biological Science) under DSC-2008, as per notification No.307559. She provided a Certificate of Proof of Local Scheduled Tribe candidate (Lr.No.A4/681/2001, dt. 23-05-2001) issued by the 4th respondent, confirming her residence in the Scheduled Area since 26.01.1950. Despite securing 36 marks in the test (Hall Ticket No. 19112101199), her appointment was withheld citing alleged non-genuineness of submitted certificates in Rc.No.B2/12875/2008, dated 21.12.2009. Petitioner therefore, filed O.A. No. 31 of 2010 in Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, contesting the decision and demanding appointment. While admitting the O.A., the Tribunal directed reservation of one post for her. However, memos (No. E/1835/09, dated 12.06.2010) and proceedings (No.E/859/2010, dated 25.06.2010) allegedly issued by the 3rd respondent were not communicated to her, thus denying her the opportunity to respond.
2. It is stated, the 3rd respondent requested the 4th respondent via Lr. No. E/1835/11, dated 11.05.2011 to provide a factu
The requirement of continuous residence since 26.01.1950 for Scheduled Tribe candidates is arbitrary and discriminatory, violating constitutional rights.
The court established that arbitrary residency requirements for Scheduled Tribe status violate constitutional rights to equality and non-discrimination.
Unilateral withdrawal of a recommendation for a Scheduled Tribe certificate without due process violates constitutional protections for Scheduled Tribes.
The insistence on pre-1950 records for caste verification is contrary to established legal principles, particularly the Supreme Court's guidelines.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that a person with a case based on falsehood has no right to approach the Court, and knowingly producing fabricated and fraudulent documents to ....
A fraudulent document is non est from the beginning and cannot be countenanced in law. A party to a litigation cannot approbate and reprobate from his stand taken before a quasi-judicial authority to....
The court upheld the cancellation of caste certificates based on a lack of valid documentation supporting claims to Scheduled Tribe status, emphasizing adherence to statutory due process.
The court established that verification of community certificates is essential to prevent fraudulent claims and that employers must ensure the genuineness of such certificates.
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
