HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 12215 OF 2018

O R D E R :

Vires of G.O.Ms.No. 7, Backward Classes Welfare (OP)

Department, dated 19.03.2018 issued by the 1^st respondent confirming the order dated 03.04.2011, whereby the 2^nd respondent cancelled the caste certificate of petitioner, is questioned in the instant Writ Petition.

The case of petitioner is that his father served in the Armed Forces between 1964-84; after his retirement, he was appointed as Watchman under Ex-servicemen quota at the heavy water plant in1985 and retired in 2003. It is stated that petitioner belongs to Tenugollu caste of BC-D category. His father obtained caste certificate to that effect in 1984 from Venkatapuram after a thorough investigation from the then Revenue Inspector. According to petitioner, he was born on 31.07.1980 at Venkatapuram, Khammam District. On his Application, the 3^rd respondent issued caste certificate vide proceedings dated 24.11.1999. He pursued employment pursuant to heavy water plant recruitment notification issued in August 2005 as Scientific Assistant Heavy Water Plant at Baroda, Gujarat later in 2010, got transferred to Aswapuram.

While so, one Mr. N. Ravi Kumar allegedly made a complaint based on which, the 2nd respondent initiated proceedings for cancellation of caste certificate. The issue was referred to Sub-Collector, Bhadrachalam on 21.02.2006 who submitted report on 16.11.2007 stating that the said certificate was bogus. The Joint Collector issued Form-V on 13.01.2008 to attend before Scrutiny Committee. Petitioner, who is stated to have been working in Gujarat at the relevant time, his father attended on his behalf and shown the caste certificates of himself and other family members to establish their genuineness. Though no further enquiry or hearing was conducted, the2nd respondent after lapse of three years passed the order dated 03.04.2011 cancelling petitioner’s caste certificate and the same was received on 09.09.2011. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioner is stated to have preferred Appeal before the 1^st respondent on 12.09.2011 along with stay petition, but as no orders were passed therein, he filed Writ Petition No. 27093 of 2011, which was disposed of on 28.09.2011 granting protection till disposal of the Appeal of the 1st respondent. Thereafter, since certain vital facts could not be raised in the Appeal, petitioner submitted a written statement along with additional grounds based on case law in October 2013, however, the 1^st respondent did not consider the grounds and issued the impugned G.O. rejecting his Appeal. The same is under challenge now.

Learned counsel for petitioner Sri Kowturu Pavan Kumar contends vehemently that the 1^st respondent without providing any opportunity to his client to prove his case, issued the impugned G.O., which is liable to be set aside. He submits that petitioner is the sole bread winner for the family and his wife and children are dependent on his income and the impugned proceedings are highly prejudicial to him and his family. The 1^st respondent failed to see that petitioner obtained certificate in 1999, as such, initiation of enquiry pursuant to a false complaint after a lapse of more than ten years is highly illegal and arbitrary, emphasises the learned counsel.

In the counter, the 1st respondent stated that the 2nd respondent passed order dated 03.04.2011 cancelling BC-D Caste Certificate of petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioner filed an Appeal before the Government under Rule 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes, Issue of Community, Nativity & Date of Birth Certificate Rules, 1993 (for short, ‘the Rules’) and requested to set aside the order of the 2^nd respondent. The Government requested the 2^nd respondent to furnish para-wise remarks along with connected records to government vide Memo dated 03.10.2011. The then Collector furnished records vide memo dated 07.12.2011. Government, after careful