IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 14957 of 2004 Between: S.Narsing Rao, S/o. Hanmantharao, O/o. Dy. District Medical and Health Officer, Siddipet Division, R/o. Donthi, Shivampet Mandal, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Medical & Health Officer, Medak at Sangareddy 2 The Director of Medical & Health Services Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 3 The Director of Tribal Welfare, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 4 The Govt. of A.P. Rep by its Secretary, Health, Medical & Family Welfare Department, Secretariat, 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 will be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the records relating to proceedings dt. 17-4- 98 issued in Rc. No. 105-18/E2/97 on the file of the 1st respondent and confirming the dismissal order in Proc. No. 2823/EID/88 dt. 31-7-89 and the judgment of the A.P. AT dt. 21-2-2003 made in O.A. No. 2105 of 1999 and to quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the 1st respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. K. RAGHUVEER REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed praying for issue of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings in Rc. No.10518/E2/97, dated 17-04-1998 of the 1st respondent and the order dated 21-02-2003 passed in O.A. No.2105 of 1999 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”) and to quash the same, as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India; and consequently to direct the 1st respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits. The petitioner claims that he belongs to Mannevarulu caste, which is a Scheduled Tribe (ST) community. He was selected for Group-IV post as Junior Assistant by Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, under Limited Recruitment and was discharging duties as such from 30-11-1976 onwards under the control of the 1st respondent. At the time of joining, he produced ST Certificate bearing No.A5/7796/75, dated 08-10-1975, issued by the Tahsildar, Medak. The said certificate was complained by one C. Boomaiah on 12-09-1983, to be false and the petitioner was placed under suspension pending enquiry by the Department, vide proceedings dated 30-06-1984. Subsequently, the Additional District Medical and Health Officer, Medak at Sangareddy, conducted an enquiry on 14-4-1987, and submitted a report to the 1st respondent on 21-8-1987. Based on the said report, a notice was issued to the petitioner on 21-4-1988, directing him to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for submitting a false caste certificate. The petitioner states that no copies of reports of the enquiry officer and the 3rd respondent were furnished to him. However, he submitted his explanation on 19-08-1988 even without the aid of said reports. The 1st respondent without properly considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner, dismissed the petitioner from service by proceedings Rc.No.2853/E1B/88, dated 31-01-1989, making the said orders effective from the date of suspension i.e. on 30-06-1984. Questioning the said order of dismissal, the petitioner filed R.P. No.4053 of 1989 before the Tribunal, which by order dated 18-11-1997 while directing supply of the copies of enquiry reports to the petitioner, directed that the enquiry proceedings be continued from the stage of supplying enquiry reports, and pursuant to which, copies of the enquiry reports were furnished to him. The petitioner states that without considering his explanation, dated 09-03-1998, in proper perspective, the disciplinary authority, by proceedings Rc.No.10518/E2/87, dated 17-04-1998, relying on the proceedings dated 25-08-1992 of the District Revenue Officer and the Additional District Magistrate, Medak at Sangareddy, who cancelled the Caste Certificate of the petitioner, confirmed the order of dismissal passed by the 1st respondent earlier on 31-01-1989. The petitioner also states that he made a representation to the Government requesting for his reinstatement into service, and the same is pending. Questioning the order of dismissal dated 17-04-1998, he filed O.A. No.2105 of 1999 before the Tribunal, and the Tribunal by the order impugned in this writ petition, dismissed the said O.A. It is stated that as the petitioner did not produce any documentary evidence to show that he belongs to ST community, the representation made by him for reinstatement was rejected by the Government vide orders passed in Memo No.37217/J2/95-03, dated 01-04-1998. The Director of Tribal Welfare, A.P., Hyderabad, who is the enquiry officer, and who enquired into the caste status of the petitioner, in his report, stated that ‘Manne Varlu’ as such, is not included in the list of scheduled tribes in Andhra Pradesh State, and ‘Manne Varlu’ is listed along with ‘Kolam’ in the Scheduled Tribes list at S.No.12 and ‘Kolam’ and ‘Manne Varlu’ are synonymous, and only those ‘kolams’, who are locally called ‘Manne Varlu’, are eligible to be treated as members of scheduled tribes, and ‘Kolam’, whose traditional habitat in Adilabad District, is declared as one of the most backward and primitive tribes by the Government of India, and thus ‘Kolam Manne Varlu’ is declared as scheduled tribe. But the petitioner is certified to be belonging to ‘Manne Varlu’ and is residing in Donthi village of Narsapur Taluk, Medak District, and the said village is far away from the traditional habitat of ‘Kolam’ (Manne Varlu) tribe. There is very high incidence of false scheduled tribe certificates under the name of ‘Manne Varlu’. It is also stated, on verification of school records of the petitioner, that the petitioner studied from 1st to 11th standards from September, 1957 to May, 1967 at Z.P. School, Donthi, Narsapur Taluk, Medak District, and the Admission Register of the said school shows that he belongs to ‘Velama’ caste, while column No.16, which is to be filled up stating whether he belongs to SC, ST or BC, is left blank. The Transfer Certificate issued by the said school also shows that the petitioner belongs to ‘Velma’ caste. It is also stated that a close relative of the petitioner i.e. Sri Manohar Gopal Rao S/o. Venkat Rao, resident of Donthi village of Narsapur Taluk, Medak District, belongs to ‘Vellappe’ community. The castes ‘Manne varlu’, ‘Velma’ and ‘Vellappe’ are not scheduled tribes. The census records and electoral rolls do not show the petitioner and his relatives as members of Scheduled Tribe. Under the circumstances, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Medak by virtue of the powers vested in him under G.O. Ms. No.282/S.W.(J) Department, dated 19-12-1988, cancelled the Caste Certificate of the petitioner issued by the Tahsildar, Medak. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Medak vide Lr.No.E4/6090/90-11, dated 10-06-1991 issued notice to the petitioner directing him to show cause as to why his ST Caste Certificate should not be cancelled and the petitioner was also given an opportunity of being heard in person. The petitioner submitted his explanation only stating that he belongs to ST Manner varlu Caste, but he did not produce any evidence in support of such a claim. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initiation of proceedings against the petitioner after a lapse of eight years after he entered into service, vitiates the entire proceedings, and in support of this argument, he relied upon a decision in Bhakthavathsala Sukumar v. M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.,[1], wherein it was held that initiation of enquiry proceedings after 9 years, and concluding the said enquiry after 13 years, is bad and illegal. He also submitted that non-furnishing of the order of District Revenue Officer, dated 25-08-1992, cancelling the Caste Certificate of the petitioner would cause prejudice to the petitioner, as it is violative of the principles of natural justice, for which he placed reliance on the above said decision (1 supra), wherein it was held as follows: “When the enquiry authority relying on a document which goes against the interest of delinquent, the enquiry authority has to furnish such a document to the delinquent to offer his remarks and non-supplying of such copy would amount to violation of principles of natural justice and such a report has to be set aside on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.” The learned counsel stated that the matter be remitted back to the authorities so as to enable the petitioner to offer his explanation again. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader contended that as directed by the Tribunal in R.P. No.4053 of 1989, copies of enquiry reports were furnished to the petitioner and he submitted explanation on 09-03-1998, and thereafter considering his explanation, dismissal order was passed on 17-04-1998. He further contended that the Director of Tribal Welfare, conducted a detailed enquiry, and the petitioner also participated in the said enquiry, and after recording the statement of the petitioner, the Director enquired into the caste status of the petitioner, his parents, his habitats, the details as to his marriage and where his father and grandfathers resided, and by taking into account the reports of the Director of Tribal Welfare and also the Sub-Collector, the District Revenue Officer cancelled the Caste Certificate of the petitioner and thereupon the dismissal order was passed. The learned Government Pleader states that there is no infirmity and illegality in conducting the enquiry. Having regard to the facts noted above, we do not find any legal infirmity in the impugned order, and the delay complained does not vitiate the proceedings. Though the petitioner joined in the service on 30-11-1976, the authorities came to know about the caste status of the petitioner only on 12-09-1983 when one Boomaiah complained about the falsity of petitioner’s caste certificate, and thereupon initiated the proceedings against him. The petitioner has not raised any grounds of delay in R.P. No.4053 of 1989 at the first instance. The contention of the petitioner that there is violation of principles of natural justice cannot be countenanced, as the petitioner was provided proper opportunity, both by way of show- cause notice from the Revenue Divisional Officer, Medak and also by granting an opportunity of personal hearing, before cancelling his caste certificate, to put forth his case, and the enquiry reports as well were also furnished to him as directed by the Tribunal in R.P. No.4053 of 1989. Under the given facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal had rightly proceeded with the matter and came to a conclusion that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought. Therefore, we see no ground to interfere with the order impugned passed by the Tribunal and accordingly the writ petition is liable to be dismissed as devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 04-09-2008 Svv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. The District Medical & Health Officer, Medak at Sangareddy 2. The Director of Medical & Health Services Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 3.The Director of Tribal Welfare, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 4.The Secretary, Health, Medical & Family Welfare Department, Govt. of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 5. 2CCs to 6. 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD} [1] 2003 (6) ALT 133