BALAKRISHNA, J. ( 1 ) ). THE petitioners are aggrieved becauserespondent-2 in response to the applications of the petitioners for grant of castecertificate issued an endorsement statingthat 'nayaka' community cannot be considered asscheduled tribe under government circular No. Swl 264 set 81 dated24-6-1981. The petitioners are furtheraggrieved because respondent-2 canceiiedthe certificate dated 24-8-1981. According to the petitioners, the circulars annexures'd' and 'e' issued by the government of Karnataka are illegal and so alsothe endorsement under Annexure-C declining the issue of caste certificate to thepetitioners. ( 2 ) THE endorsement reads as follows :"sri k. Mallappa, ravi nilaya, tilaknagar, shimoga is hereby endorsed thathis request for issuing the st. Castecertificate for 'nayaka caste' cannot beconsidered as he has not satisfied therequirements of government circularno. Swl 264 set 81 Bangalore, dated24-6-1981. The S. T. certificate alreadyissued to him on 24-8-1981 is herebycancelled in view of the g. o. No. Swl104 dated 1-9-1981. " ( 3 ) BY examining the endorsementissued by the tahsildar. I do not find anyelement of arbitrariness. But, on theother hand, I find that the tahsildar hasapplied his mind and formed an opinionafter bearing in mind the guidelines provided by the government of Karnataka inits circulars under annexures 'd' and 'e'. in fact, Annexure-E is a clarificationissued by the state government regarding'nayaka' community. It cannot be saidthat the refusal to issue scheduled tribecertificate to the petitisners who belongto nayaka community is unsupported byreasons and is arbitrary. Hence, I can notfind fault with Annexure-C and the writpetitions fail in so far as Annexure-C isconcerned. ( 4 ) ANNEXURE-D is a circular issuedby the state government offering guidelines to the officers who are empoweredto issue caste certificates and especiallythe tahsildars calling upon them to scrutinise very carefully claims for issue ofcaste certificates in respect of scheduledtribes. In fact, this circular commendsverification and reliable enquiries before adecision is taken to issue the castecertificate. I do not find anything offensive either to reason or to law in Annexure-D to strike it down as illegal. Onthe other hand, I am of the opinion thatit affords light and guidance to the certificate-issuing authorities in the process ofdecision making for the purpose of issueof caste certificates. I also regard thecircular ss one which prevents arbitraryorders. I do not find anything offensive either to reason or to law in Annexure-D to strike it down as illegal. Onthe other hand, I am of the opinion thatit affords light and guidance to the certificate-issuing authorities in the process ofdecision making for the purpose of issueof caste certificates. I also regard thecircular ss one which prevents arbitraryorders. ( 5 ) AS regards Annexure-E , the circular is nothing but a clarification issuedby the state government regarding thedetermination of the question whether aperson belongs to nayaka community andwhether nayaka community is a part ofscheduled tribes. This clarification wasissued because the director of socialwelfare had reported that Sri Valmikivardhaka Sangha, Tumkur, had requestedhim to recognise the hostel started bythem as scheduled tribes hostel for thepurpose of grants contending that theybelong to nayaka community which findsa place in the list of scheduled tribesand had sought clarificationwhether oneof the synonm of the 'beda' of the backwardtribes i. e. nayaka which was deleted from the list of backward tribes under government order dated 23-1-1978 consequent upon the enforcement of the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (Amendment) Act, 1976 with effect from 27-7-1977 is to be treated as scheduled tribes. Thereafter, by order dated 1-9-1981 the government after careful examination recognised nayaka in si. No. 17 and naik in si. No. 16 as backward tribes throughout the state of Karnataka. Consequently, the order deleting 'nayaka' from the list of backward tribes appended to government order dated 23-1-1978 and in government order dated 1-5-1979 came to be withdrawn and this clarificatory circular cautioned the authorities empowered, to issue caste certificates to verify carefully the claims of the members who claim to belong to scheduled tribes and upon satisfying themselves that they manifest tribal characteristes as laid down by the government of India in circular No. Swl 264 set 81 dated 24-6-1981 may issue such certificates. ( 6 ) I am unable to find any illegality in this circular with which the petitioners are finding fault. I must observe that this circular, on the other hand, is perfectly valid and offers guidance to the officials who are empowered to issue caste certificates and eliminates the scope for incongruity. I do not find any substance in the contention of the petitioners that this circular is liable to be struck down as illegal. I must observe that this circular, on the other hand, is perfectly valid and offers guidance to the officials who are empowered to issue caste certificates and eliminates the scope for incongruity. I do not find any substance in the contention of the petitioners that this circular is liable to be struck down as illegal. ( 7 ) IN the light of the above discussion, I find there is no merit in these writ petitions and hence they are dismissed. Writ petitions dismissed. --- *** --- .