IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 16706 of 2002 BETWEEN: P. Kalyan Chakravarthy, Rep. by his father Mr. P. Venkataraman, S/o. late P. Jagannatham age 57 yrs, Government Servant R/o. Hyderabad. ... PETITIONER AND 1 Convenor (Admissions) Eamcet-2002 A.P. State Council for Higher Education, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Tribal Welfare T.S. Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 3 The District Level Scrutiny Committee, Rep. by the Chairman & Joint Collector, Srikakulam District. 4 The Collector Hyderabad, Hyderabad District. 5 Principal, Mahathma Gandhi Institute of Technology, Gandipet, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus a) declaring the action of the respondents in not following the procedures as contemplated in the Andhra Pradesh has made A.P.(Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation Rules 1997and not permitting the petitioner to join the Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Technology, Gandipet, Hyderabad as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and violative of express provisions of the Acts and Rules i.e., Andhra Pradesh has made A.P.(Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation b) consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to join the 5th respondent college and pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SIVA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner submits that he belongs to ST community and he appeared for EAMCET 2002 engineering segment and obtained a rank of 103013. He was offered a seat in the Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Technology (MGIT), Gandipet, Hyderabad in B.Tech (Mechatronics) but he was declined admission doubting his caste as ST. Aggrieved by the denial to admit him in the fifth respondent engineering college, the petitioner filed this Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not following the procedures as contemplated in the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation Rules, 1997 (for short ‘the Regulation Rules’) and not permitting him to join in the fifth respondent college as illegal and arbitrary and direct the respondents to permit him joint the fifth respondent college. 2. This Court while admitting the writ petition on 06.09.2002 directed the respondents to grant provisional admission to the petitioner in MGIT in order to enable him to join the classes of B.Tech (Mechatronics) pending enquiry with regard to the social status of the petitioner in accordance with the Regulation Rules. The said order was made absolute on 30.07.2003. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the sister of the petitioner - Pathiwada Pavani filed a similar WP.No.26085 of 2000 seeking her admission into B.Tech (Computer Course) under the quota of ST candidates. This Court granted similar interim order and ultimately disposed the writ petition by order dated 25.07.2007 holding that the status certificate of the petitioner therein and her family members has been questioned in WP.No.11062 of 2004 and in view of the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition and the petitioner having completed her education basing on the provisional admission, her claim of ST status in future either in employment or any other benefit will abide by the decision in the writ petition filed by her questioning the cancellation of caste certificate. He further submits that the petitioner herein is entitled for the same relief. 4. In view of the pendency of the writ petition in WP.No.11062 of 2004 filed questioning the cancellation of the caste certificate of the petitioner’s sister and his family members and as the petitioner has completed his education basing on the provisional admission, his claim of ST status in future either in employment or any other benefit will abide by the decision in the aforesaid writ petition filed questioning the cancellation of caste certificate. 5. In view of the above, it is suffice to say that the interim order obtained by the petitioner for prosecuting studies in the seat earmarked for ST candidates cannot enure any benefit to claim tribal status. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J June 17, 2008 DSK