THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRIAH W.P.NO.24717 OF 2001 O R D E R Heard both the counsel. 2. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal dated 29.10.2001 passed by the 2nd respondent – The Assistant General and the Competent Authority, National Insurance Company Ltd., Madras Regional Oﬃcer, Annasalai, Chennai in dismissing the petitioner from service, who was working as Assistant Administrative Oﬃcer in the 2nd respondent – National Insurance Company, the present writ petition is filed. 3. The case of the petitioner as stated in the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the writ petition is that he belongs to ‘Mala’ Community and the Tahsildar Charminar also issued certiﬁcate No.L.Dis.No.3595/83 dated 9.9.193. The petitioner was appointed as Agent in the 2nd respondent – Insurance Company on 18.4.1983 and later he was appointed as Inspector on probation, by proceedings dated 2.7.1984 and subsequently, he was promoted as Assistant Administrative Oﬃcer by proceedings dated 24.12.1992. Based on the complaint, that has produced false caste certiﬁcate, the 2nd respondent – Insurance Company referred to matter to the District Collector, Hyderabad for conﬁrmation of caste certiﬁcate. However, the company also initiated domestic enquiry and the enquiry oﬃcer found the petitioner guilty of the charge and after issuing show cause notice, inﬂicted the punishment of dismissal from service by order dated 29.10.2001 and aggrieved by the same, he filed the present writ petition. 4. The contention of the petitioner is that the domestic enquiry was conducted in violation of the principles of natural justice. His case is that though he produced the caste certiﬁcate no.059267 under Cert.No.E/264/2001 dated 17.3.2001 issued by the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, Charminar, conﬁrming that the petitioner belong to ‘Mala’ community, the enquiry oﬃcer, by not considering the said document and in utter violation of the principles of natural justice, found the petitioner guilty and hence the same is not sustainable. The further contention of the petitioner is that when the 2nd respondent – Company has referred the matter to the District Collector, it ought not have initiated parallel proceedings and found the petitioner guilty, and it ought to have waited for the report of the District Collector with regard to social status of the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that under Section 21 of A.P. (ST, SC and BC) Regulation of Issue of Community Certiﬁcates Act, 1993 and under Rule 21 of the Rules 1997, a community certiﬁcate issued by the Competent authority should be treated as a valid certiﬁcate, unless it is cancelled and the 2nd respondent – Insurance Company is not justiﬁed in dismissing the petitioner from service on the ground that he produced the false certificate. With these averments the dismissal order was sought to be set aside. 5. On behalf of the respondents 2 and 3 – Insurance company counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled and it is stated inter alia that the petitioner himself confessed the guilt and hence there was no other option except to ﬁnd the petitioner guilty. Therefore, the enquiry oﬃcer found the petitioner guilty and accordingly he was inﬂicted with the punishment of dismissal from service and there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the averments made in the writ aﬃdavit further submitted that initially when the matter was referred to the District Collector, Hyderabad, he passed orders dated 7.6.2007 canceling the S.C. Mala Caste Certiﬁcate, but subsequently in the appeal ﬁled by the petitioner to the Government under Section 7(2) of Act 16 of 1993, the Government has set aside the order of the District Collector and accordingly issued G.O.Ms.No.40 Social Welfare (CV.1) Department dated 11.3.2008. Therefore, he submitted by virtue of the G.O.Ms.No.40, the social status of the petitioner that he belong to Schedule Caste (mala) community is conﬁrmed and hence the charge against the petitioner that he produced false caste certiﬁcate, cannot be sustained and, therefore, sought to set aside the impugned order of dismissal and direct the reinstatement of the petitioner with all attendant beneﬁts. He further submitted that the petitioner made a representation on 17.3.2008 along with G.O.Ms.No.40, but the 2 nd respondent has not considered the same till date. 7. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 submitted that the G.O.Ms.No.40 is issued pending the writ petition during the month of March, 2008 and the petitioner also made representation only on 17.3.2008 and hence there was no opportunity for the Company to consider the same and, therefore, he submitted that the company may be directed to pass appropriate orders taking the G.O.Ms.No.40 into consideration. 8. From the material on record, there is no dispute that the petitioner, prior to the date of dismissal was working as Assistant Administrative Oﬃcer in the 2nd respondent – Company and on the ground that he produced false caste certiﬁcate, domestic enquiry was conducted and analogously, the matter was also referred to the District Collector, Hyderabad. In the domestic enquiry, the petitioner was found guilty. The District Collector, Hyderabad by proceedings dated 16.4.2007 has cancelled the S.C. Mala Caste Certiﬁcate of the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the cancellation proceedings dated 16.4.2007 under Section 7 (2) of Act 16 of 1993 before the Government and the Government set aside the order of the District Collector dated 16.4.2007 and issued G.O.Ms.No.40 Social Welfare (CV.1) Department dated 11.3.2008. The relevant portion of the G.O. for better appreciation is extracted as under: “7. So from above discussion it is crystal clear that the father’s caste ﬂows to the children in the case of Appellant, the father of the appellant belongs to SC Mala Community whereas his mother belongs to Golla “BC” and the appellant brought up by his father and mother and he was subjected to disabilities that were faced by his community i.e., SC Mala in the society. Therefore, the community of the appellant cannot be suspected and the cancellation of his community certificate by the Collector is not correct. 8. Heard the case on 11.2.2008, on examination of the records, reports and proceedings of the District Collector, Hyderabad, along with grounds and documents, written arguments and Court judgments submitted by the appellant and his counsel and it is found that: 1. The MRO, Ghatkesar Mandal, had enquired the matter with the help of village elders of Korremul (V) of Ghatkesar Mandal reveals that Temaru Rajalingam son of Kistaiah belongs to SC Mala community when he was young and while working as Mason he married a BC “Golla” community girl and brought to the village. Subsequently, he left Korremula (V) due to objection raised by village elders. Since then, he resided in Hyderabad. To this eﬀect the statements of village elders have been recorded. The village elders 1. Sri Kurri Narsimha aged about 78 years, Caste SC Madiga of Korremula (V) 2. Sri Bhavani Gandaiah, aged about 80 years, SC Madiga caste, R/o Korremula (V) 3. Sri Jangli Mysaiah, R/o Korremula aged about 80 years, caste as SC Mala, have revealed that Temaru Rajalingam s/o Kistaiah originally belongs to Korremula (V) Ghatkesar (M), and he belongs to SC mala Community. He got married with BC “Golla” community girl. 2. The Collector, Ranga Reddy, has also submitted the enquiry report which reveals that the MRO, Ghatkesar (M) has reported that T.Rajalingam S/O Kistaiah who is father of Sri T.Prakash originally belongs to Korremula (V) Ghatkesar (M) R.R. District and he belongs to SC “Mala Caste”, he got married with BC Golla community girl and left the village due to objections made by the village elders. Basing on the above reports that the appellant belongs to SC Mala Caste. Hence, the proceedings of the Collector, Hyderabad, is not correct. In view of the above, and in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 7 of Act 16 of 1993, and rules made there issued in G.O.Ms.No.58 SW (J) Department, dated 12.5.1997, the appeal petition ﬁled by Sri T.Prakash s/o late Sri T.Rajalingam, is allowed duly canceling the proceedings No.D6/1132/98 dated 16.4.2007, issued by the District Collector, Hyderabad.” 9. The charge against the petitioner is that he produced false caste certiﬁcate claiming to be S.C. mala. But from the above G.O. it is clear that the social status of the petitioner is conﬁrmed as S.C. Mala. Therefore, the charge against the petitioner cannot be sustained and consequently the impugned order of dismissal dated 29.10.2001 also cannot be sustained. However, as per the submission of the counsel for the respondents 2 and 3, the petitioner has made representation only on 17.3.2008 along with the above said G.O. and the same is pending consideration. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances and in view of G.O.Ms.No.40 dated 11.3.2008, the impugned order dated 29.10.2001 is set aside and the respondent 2 shall consider the representation of the petitioner 17.3.2008 in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders with regard to reinstatement of the petitioner along with all attendant beneﬁts viz., seniority, promotion and arrears of salary, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. AVS -------------------------------- -- 06—11—2008 Note: Issue C.C. in one week. B/O