IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3255 of 2008 Between: 1 D. Ananthaiah, S/o. Lakshmappa 2 D. Sreedhara Murthy, S/o.D. Ananthaiah, 3 Kum. D. Suneethamma, D/o.D. Ananthaiah, All are residents of Muddalapuram Village, Kudair Mandal, Anathapur District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Tahsildar (MRO), Kudair Village and Mandal, Ananthapur District. 2 The District Collector and District Magistrate, Ananthapur. 3 The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Social Welfare Department Rep. by its Special Chief Secretary, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue appropriate Writ or order or direction mostly one which is in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Memo No.8307/CV.1/2007, Dated 09.01.2008 of the 3rd respondent arising out of the Endorsement in R.C.No.186/2003, Dated 18.09.2003 of the 1st respondent and order in RC.No.MC 3/4200/2004, Dated 14.09.2007 of the 2nd respondent as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, unjustified and unsustainable and set aside all the above said three orders holding that the petitioners are belonging to the scheduled caste of Dombara (SC) and entitled for issue of the caste certificate as belonging to SC and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: In this Writ Petition, the petitioners have challenged the order of the third respondent-Government passed in Memo No.8307/CV.1/2007, dated 9th January, 2008, by which the appeal stated to have been filed by the petitioners was rejected on the ground of limitation, without going into the merits of the claim. Petitioners applied to the first respondent-Tahsildar (MRO), for grant of caste certificate under Section 3 of the AP (SC, ST & BC) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’). It is their claim that they belong to Dombara caste, which is classified as a Scheduled Caste, but, the first respondent, who is the primary authority, rejected their claim vide order in R.C.No.186,2003, dated 18-09-2003, by recording a finding that they belong to Backward Caste. As against the said order, the petitioners filed an appeal under Section 7(1) of the Act before the second respondent-Collector and District Magistrate, who vide order dated 14th September, 2007 in RC.No.MC3/4200/2004, dismissed the appeal, but, observed that further appeal shall lie before the Government against his order. Carried away by the said observation, it is stated that the petitioners have filed second appeal before the third respondent- Government on 07-11-2007, but, the same was dismissed as time barred vide Memo No.830-7/CV.1/2007, dated 09- 01-2008. Hence, the present Writ Petition. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioners that though no further appeal lies to the Government as against the dismissal order passed by the second respondent in the appeal filed under Section 7(1) of the Act, carried away by the observation made by the second respondent in his order dated 14th September, 2007, to the effect that a further appeal is provided under Section 7(2) of the Act, the petitioners have termed the petition filed before the Government as an appeal. In fact the only remedy available to the petitioners was to file a revision under Section 8 of the Act, and as per Rule 12 of the AP (SC, ST & BC) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Rules, 1997 (for short ‘the Rules’) framed under the Act, the limitation for filing a revision is sixty days. It is further submitted that inasmuch as the order of the second respondent is dated 14th September, 2007, the prescribed limitation of 60 days would end on 13th November, 2007 and as the petitioners have already preferred an appeal within the said period on 07-11-2007, the third respondent-Government ought to have considered the same on merits. On the other hand, it is submitted by learned Government. Pleader appearing for the respondents that the petitioners have filed appeal under Section 7(2) of the Act, as per which, limitation was only 30 days, therefore, his appeal was rightly rejected by the third respondent- Government. From a perusal of sub sections (1) and (2) of Section 7 of the Act, it is clear that against the order of rejection of an application made under Section 3 of the Act for grant of caste certificate, appeal lies to the Government under Section 7(1) of the Act and the appeal provided under Section 7(2) of the Act is confined to the orders passed by the District Collector under Section 5 of the Act. Inasmuch as the order passed by the first respondent was under Section 3 of the Act, the only remedy available to the petitioners was to prefer an appeal under Section 7(1) of the Act and the same has already been availed of. However, the remedy of revision before the Government is under Section 8 of the Act. Though no second appeal lies to the Government, but however, in view of the observations made by the second respondent himself in the order dated 14-09-2007, it appears that the petitioners have carried the matter further by way of second appeal. As it is the case of the petitioners that the said petition was termed as an appeal only in view of the observation made by the District Collector, in the absence of any remedy of second appeal provided under the Act, it is to be treated only as revision under Section 8 of the Act, for which limitation is 60 days. As the petitioners have already moved the Government on 07-11-2007, which is much before the expiry of 60 days on 14-11-2007, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition setting aside Memo No.8307/CV.1/2007, dated 9th January, 2008, and direct the Government to treat the second appeal filed by the petitioners on 07-11-2007 as revision under Section 8 of the Act and dispose of the same on its own merits. Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs. __________________ (R.Subhash Reddy, J) 19th February, 2008 lur ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Tahsildar (MRO), Kudair Village and Mandal, Ananthapur District. 2 The District Collector and District Magistrate, Ananthapur. 3 The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Social Welfare Department Rep. by its Special Chief Secretary, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad. 4.2CCs to the G.P. for Revenue. 5.2CD copies