HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.16880 of 2010 Date: July 16, 2010 Between: Smt. Kommalapati Kondamma, W/o.Kommalapati- Venkataiah, Aged 47 years, Occ: agriculture, R/o.Erraguntla village, Allinagaram Gram Panchayat, Komarolu Mandal, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh … Petitioner And The Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission, represented by its Secretary, II Floor, Budha Bhavan, M.G. Road, Secunderabad, and four Others … Respondents Order: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of election of the fifth respondent herein to the post of President, Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituency, Komarolu III, Komarolu Mandal, Prakasam District. Elections were held to the post of President, Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituency, Komarolu Mandal, Prakasam District, as a result of the death of one Smt. Isukala Devamma, who belonged to Scheduled Caste. The petitioner, who claims to be belonging to Scheduled Caste, was one of the contesting candidates. It is her grievance that the fifth respondent herein, who belongs to B.C. community, produced false certificate showing that she belongs to Scheduled Caste and based on such certificate she was declared elected; as such the very election is to be declared illegal and the same is to be quashed. Even according to the petitioner, the caste certificate issued to the fifth respondent by the competent authority is still in force. So long as the caste certificate issued to the fifth respondent under the provisions of Andhra P ra d e s h (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes & Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act 1993 is not cancelled, it cannot be said that the fifth respondent does not belong to Scheduled Caste and her election cannot be declared illegal. Moreover, in view of the provision under Section 233 of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, disputes with regard to elections are to be presented only before the Tribunal constituted under the Act and a writ petition is not maintainable. For the aforesaid reasons, the petitioner cannot seek quashing of the election of the fifth respondent in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. However, if the petitioner is of the view that the fifth respondent has obtained false caste certificate and basing on the same got elected, it would be open to the petitioner to approach the competent authority seeking cancellation of the said caste certificate. ___________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) July 16, 2010 MRR