THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION Nos. 29283 and 29336 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: These two Writ Petitions can be dealt with together, as they arise under identical fact situation and also raise substantially the same question. Both the writ petitioners claim their social status as Scheduled Tribe based upon their belief that they belong to Konda Kapu, which is recognized as a Scheduled Tribe in State of Andhra Pradesh. They were granted admission in the 4th respondent college in the I year B. Tech course, however, the social status claim has been verified and the Commissioner for Tribal Welfare has communicated to the Collector and District Magistrate, East Godavari at Kakinada through the impugned communication dated 27.09.2010 that he suspects the writ petitioners either belonging to Kapu or Turpu Kapu community, but they do not belong to Konda Kapu community which is a recognized Scheduled Tribe. The Commissioner of Tribal Welfare therefore, requested the Collector to cause a detailed enquiry in terms of the provisions contained in Act No. 16 of 1993 and the Rules made there under and inform the action taken to the Convener EAMCET-2010 Admissions, at the earliest. Though the writ petitioners have raised several contentions, which were again canvassed before me by the learned counsel for the writ petitioners, I do not consider it appropriate to deal with them at this stage. As was noticed supra, through the impugned communication, all that the Commissioner of Tribal Welfare did was expressing his prima facie opinion that the writ petitioners may not belong to Konda Kapu community. He therefore, ordered for a detailed enquiry to be conducted in accordance with the provisions contained in Act No. 16 of 1993 and the Rules made there under. No person, who has claimed his social status as a member belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or Backward Classes, can be said to be aggrieved, if an enquiry is conducted in accordance with the provisions contained in Act No. 16 of 1993 by the competent authority. At such an enquiry, the person, who is claiming the social status, would be provided the necessary opportunity for leading evidence in support of his claim. That will be taken into account and consideration before a final opinion is expressed by the competent authority about the genuineness or lack of it in the claim. Therefore, in my considered opinion, both these Writ Petitions have been instituted prematurely. However, one contention, which was canvassed by Sri J. Kanakaiah, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, deserves to be addressed. The learned counsel would submit that the 4th respondent college is now seeking to cancel the admission of the writ petitioners, as the Commissioner of Tribal Welfare doubted the genuineness of the claim of the writ petitioners herein as members belonging to Scheduled Tribe. It is to be pointed out that the admission granted in favour of the writ petitioners by the Convener EAMCET-2010 Admissions is only a provisional admission. The same will abide by the result of the enquiry that is now ordered to be conducted by the Collector and District Magistrate, East Godavari, in accordance with the provisions contained in Act 16 of 1993. Therefore, till such time the enquiry is completed and the result thereof is made known to the petitioners, the provisional admission granted in favour of the two petitioners herein cannot either be cancelled nor can the petitioners be stopped from attending to the classes or taking the examinations both internal and external. It is, therefore, only appropriate to direct the 4th respondent not to take any steps to cancel the admissions granted in favour of the writ petitioners into the I year B.Tech course till such time the findings of enquiry under Act No. 16 of 1993 are made available by the Collector and District Magistrate, East Godavari to it. With this, both the Writ Petitions stand disposed of. It is needless to observe that the Collector and District Magistrate, East Godavari would ensure that after providing appropriate opportunity (ies) to the petitioners herein, the enquiry will be concluded as expeditiously as is possible, at any rate within a period of six months from today. No costs. ---------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J 24th November 2010 ksld ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}