IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.19086 of 2004 Between: R.Krishna Murthy, S/o P.M.Lakshmaiah, O/o The Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Enforcement, Chittoor ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, B.C.Welfare Department, Secretariat, HYderabad 2 The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor post and District 3 The Deputy Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Kurnool, Kurnool District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in disposing the appeal petition of the petitioner in Memo No.4248/C1/2003-2, dated 30-4-2004 without notice is contrary to Section 7(2) of Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of issue of Community Certificate Act, 1993 and consequently set aside the Memo No.4248/C1/2003-2, dated 30-4-2004 of the 1st respondent Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI B.NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.19086 of 2004 ORDER: The petitioner impugns Memo No.4248/C1/2003-2, dated 30.04.2004, of the ﬁrst respondent whereby and whereunder the appeal ﬁled by the petitioner under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certiﬁcates Act, 1993 (the Act, for brevity), is dismissed. The brief fact of the matter, which is not in dispute, is as follows. The petitioner claims that he belongs to Ediga Balija caste, which his one of the recognized backward classes. His name was sponsored based on which he was appointed as Lower Division Accountant in Chittoor District Treasury in 1976. Sometime thereafter, he appeared for Group-IV examination conducted by Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission. He got selected and was allotted to Excise Department. In 1994 he was also promoted as Senior Assistant. On a complaint made by one R.Venugopal Naidu, the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise ordered enquiry. Enquiry was conducted by the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise. In the enquiry, the petitioner appears to have agreed to take last rank among approved probationers in the category of Junior Assistants. Thus, he was brought from Serial No.7 to 16 in the seniority list. There was yet another complaint made by the Andhra Pradesh State Prohibition and Excise Executive Staﬀ Welfare Association that the petitioner obtained bogus BC (Ediga Balija) Caste Certiﬁcate, though he belongs to Gajula Balija. This complaint was referred to District Collector under Section 5 of the Act. After causing enquiry by the District Level Scrutiny Committee, the District Collector passed orders on 17.01.2003 cancelling the Caste Certiﬁcate issued to the petitioner as Ediga Balija. The petitioner then preferred an appeal to the Government, who dismissed the same by a brief order not exceeding one paragraph. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, besides others, argued that the impugned order without reasons is unsustainable. There cannot be any doubt that the Government while exercising quasi judicial powers under Section 7 of the Act is expected to notice the facts, the ﬁndings and reasons therefor issued by the lower authority, the arguments made on behalf of the petitioner before the Government, frame points for consideration and discuss each point with reference to the facts and law applicable thereto. None of them are present in the impugned order. A passionate order, however logical might be, does not satisfy requirements of law that an appellate authority has to apply mind to all the facts on record and pass orders. For this reason, the impugned order is unsustainable. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order of the Government is set aside and the matter is remitted to them with a direction to dispose of the same afresh after giving notice to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 13.11.2008 vs To 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, B.C.Welfare Department, Secretariat, HYderabad 2 The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor post and District 3 The Deputy Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 4 2CCs to G.P for Social Welfare, High Court of A.P, Hyderabad. 5 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSR}