ORDER:

Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for respondent No.1.

2. The petitioner has challenged the proceedings, dated 27.08.2004 issued by the respondent No.1, terminating his services from the Corporation. As seen from the said proceedings, the respondent No.1 is said to have conducted a discrete enquiry, with respect to the caste certificate, dated 28.06.1972 issued by the Additional Tahsildar, Sunabeda, Koraput District. The said discrete enquiry appears to have been initiated by referring to a news item in Eenadu Telugu Daily, dated 11.07.2002, 12.07.2002 and 15.07.2002.

3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that initiation of enquiry, without any proper notice to the petitioner is illegal and that apart provisions of Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh SC, ST and BC Regulation Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 were not complied. It is also submitted that unless the caste certificate issued by the competent authority is held to be non genuine by following the provisions of the Act. The certificate issued by the competent authority should prevail.

Section 21 of the Act reads as follows:

“21. Transitional Provisions:--A community certificate issued by any authority competent to issue the same under the relevant rules or orders before the commencement of this Act shall, unless it is cancelled under the provisions of this Act, be valid and shall be deemed to have been issued under the provisions of this Act”.

4. The petitioner joined the services of the respondent No.1 on 06.05.1980 as Junior Supervisor and the show cause notice dated 01.01.2004 was issued to him alleging that the petitioner has submitted a fake caste certificate. The petitioner has submitted a caste certificate dated 28.06.1992, at the time of joining the service of the respondent No.1. Relying upon a news paper article, the impugned show cause notice was issued which was challenged by the petitioner by filing W.P.No.1215 of 2004. The said writ petition was disposed of, with directions to the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 therein to consider the objections of the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his objections and representation to the show cause notice, without considering the same the impugned proceedings, dated

27.08.2004 are issued.

5. Learned Senior counsel submits that the petitioner after filing the present writ petition, this Court has granted him stay of the proceedings and the petitioner continued in service, till the date of attaining the age of superannuation. The petitioner passed away on 10.05.2011 and the wife of the petitioner is brought on record as a legal representative.

6. Learned Senior counsel submits that by virtue of interim order of this Court the petitioner No.1 has served the respondent No.1 till the date of attaining the age of superannuation. He further submits that on account of pendency of the writ petition the terminal benefits are not disbursed by the respondent No.1 to the petitioner.

7. Learned Standing counsel for the respondent No.1 submits that the petitioner was appointed on 06.05.1990. The appointment letter issued to the petitioner categorically refers to the right of the respondent No.1 in terminating his services of the petitioner in the event of the petitioner is found to have submitted any false or untrue or if any material is suppressed and as such, submits that no relief can be granted to the petitioner and he also submits that the caste certificate submitted by the petitioner is a fake certificate and as such, his services were rightly terminated by the respondent No.1.

8. Considering the submissions of both the learned counsels and after perusing the material on record, the impugned proceedings dated 27.08.2004 are certainly not backed by any proceedings of the competent authority cancelling the community certificate.

Section 5 of the Act reads as follows:

“5. Cancellation of the false community certificate - (1) Where, before, or after the commencement of this