THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.5165 of 2009 Dated 14th July, 2011 Between: Madine Satyanarayana …Petitioner And The District Collector, East Godavari District at Kakinada and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri N.Siva Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP for Social Welfare The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in completing the enquiry on the petitioner’s complaint, dated 16.09.2006, with regard to the community status of respondent No.3 as illegal and arbitrary. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that he has unsuccessfully contested against respondent No.3 for the office of Sarpanch of Prathipadu Gram Panchayat, East Godavari District. The petitioner has filed an election petition questioning the election of respondent No.3 and that the said election petition has become abortive with the expiry of the term, for which, respondent No.3 has been elected. Simultaneously, the petitioner has filed his complaint on 16.09.2006 before respondent Nos.1 and 2 on the community status of respondent No.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the said complaint, respondent Nos.1 and 2 have not initiated any action. Under the provisions of the A.P.(Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issuance of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’) and the Rules framed thereunder, whenever any complaint with regard to the community status certificate obtained by any person belonging to SC, ST and BC categories is received by respondent No.1, he shall initiate appropriate proceedings for ascertaining the genuineness or otherwise of such certificates. Therefore, he is under statutory obligation to take appropriate action on the petitioner’s complaint/representation with regard to the community status of respondent No.3. As the petitioner’s grievance sought to be espoused in this writ petition appears to be innocuous in nature, respondent No.1 is directed to initiate appropriate action in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder and complete the process after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and respondent No.3 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.6754 of 2009 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 14th July, 2011 VGB