THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.17382 OF 2005 Dated 22nd December, 2009 Between: Vishnupriya Devi …Petitioner And The Commissioner of Tribal Welfare And three others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri M.Vidyasagar Counsel for respondent No.2: Sri D.V.Nagarjuna Babu The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed for issuance of a Certiorari to quash memo dated 27.07.2005, issued by respondent No.1. Heard Sri M.Vidyasagar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned counsel representing respondent No.2. There is no representation for respondents 1, 3 and 4. The petitioner claims to belong to ‘Konda Dora’ caste, a notified Scheduled Tribe. She passed intermediate in the year 2004 and applied for EMACET-2005 for taking admission into MBBS course. Before she was admitted into MBBS course, respondent No.1 issued the impugned memo, whereby he called upon the petitioner to attend his Office on 04.08.2005 along with an elderly member of her family with oral and documentary evidence to substantiate her status as Scheduled Tribe. Respondent No.1 also directed that the seat may be kept in abeyance until further orders and that no fees shall be accepted from the petitioner until clearance certificate is issued. The petitioner questioned this memo, insofar as it pertains to the latter two directions, namely; keeping the seat in abeyance and directing the Health University not to accept the fees. No counter-affidavit is filed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under Rule 10 of the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issuance of Community Certificates Rules, 1997 (for short “the Rules”), the Commissioner of Tribal Welfare is empowered either suo motu or on a written complaint by any person or on request made by an employer/educational institution/appointing authority to enquire into the correctness of any community, nativity and date of birth certificate already issued and if it is found that the said certificate is obtained fraudulently, he shall refer the case to the concerned Collector to the Government for its cancellation as per the procedure laid down in Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issuance of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short “the Act”). He, therefore, submitted that the only power with which respondent No.1 is vested is to hold a preliminary enquiry and submit his report to the District Collector for taking appropriate action in accordance with the procedure laid down by the provisions of the Act. Even, according to the impugned memo, the power of respondent No.1 is confined to making enquiry and referring the case to the Collector concerned, for cancellation of the certificate by following the procedure laid down under Section 5 of the Act. Therefore, the power to give the above mentioned two directions, namely; to keep the seat in abeyance and not to accept the fees, is not available with respondent No.1 and to that extent, the impugned memo is set aside. It is, however, left open to respondent No.1 to proceed with the enquiry proposed in the impugned memo and submit an appropriate report to respondent No.3 for taking action under the provisions of the Act. Subject to the above, the writ petition is allowed in part. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 22nd December, 2009 vrn