ORDER :- The petitioner is a resident of Khammam Town. He contested in the elections to the Municipality, and was elected as a Councillor for 16th Ward, which was reserved for B.C. candidates. A person, by name, V. Srinivasa Rao, submitted a complaint to the District Collector, Khammam, the 2nd respondent herein, alleging that the petitioner does not belong to B.C. category, and, in fact, he is a 'Setti Balija', which is equivalent to 'Telaga Community' in Khammam District, and the same is not recognized as backward class. 2. The 2nd respondent called for a report from the Revenue Divisional Officer, Khammam. After conducting preliminary enquiry, the Revenue Divisional Officer has reported that the caste of the brother and sister of the petitioner was recorded as Telaga (OC) in the Yasaswi Vidyaniketan, Khammam, and even the caste of the son of the petitioner was also mentioned as Telaga. The RDO further infom1ed that there were subsequent interpolations in the registers 3. The 2nd respondent issued show-cause notice dated 13.10.2000 to the petitioner, directing him to explain as to why the caste certificate issued to him, on 15.2.2000 by the MRO, Khammam (Urban), shall not be cancelled. The petitioner submitted his explanation, and a detailed hearing had also taken place. Through his order dated 27.5.2002 the 1st respondent directed cancellation of the caste certificate of the petitioner, in exercise of the powers under the AP (SC, ST and BCs) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act'), and the Rules made there under. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 7(2) of the Act, before the 1st respondent. The appeal was dismissed on 6.3.2003. Hence, this writ petition 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the forefathers of his client are from Krishna District, and the Setti BaJija Caste is recognized as B.C. in the districts of Visakhapatnam, East-Godavari, West Godavari and Krishna Districts; and the subsequent migration of his father to Nellore, and thereafter to Khammam, does not have any impact on their social status. He contends that the petitioner was not given adequate opportunity to place the relevant material, to prove that his forefathers are from Krishna District. 5. He contends that the petitioner was not given adequate opportunity to place the relevant material, to prove that his forefathers are from Krishna District. 5. Learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare, on the other hand, submits that the father of the petitioner studied at Venkatagiri, Nellore District and there, he was not recognized as belonging to B.C, since Setti Balija was not recognized as B.C., in that district. He contends that, since the father of the petitioner did not claim the status of B.C., the question of the petitioner claiming it, does not arise. 6. To start with, the undisputed fact is that the petitioner belongs to Setti Balija caste. This caste, however, is recognized as B.C., only in four districts of the State, viz., Visakhapatnam, East-Godavari, West Godavari and Krishna. In other places, it is not recognized as B.C. The father of the petitioner studied at Venkatagiri in Nellore District. His caste was mentioned as Setti Balija (O.C.), since it is not B.C., in that district. After studies, he migrated to Khammam; and naturally the petitioner and his brother and sister studied in institutions at Khammam. Their caste was also mentioned as Telaga, which is equivalent to Setti Balija, in this part of the State. In the school record, it was also mentioned that it is O.C. At a later point of time, certain interpolations were found in the school registers. The caste of the son of the petitioner was mentioned as Telaga (O.C) in the school records. 7. The only basis on which the petitioner claims the status of B.C. is that, his forefathers hail from Krishna District. Though ample opportunity was given to the petitioner, to substantiate that contention, he did not place any material before the 2nd respondent. 8. Be that as it may, one important aspect, which needs to be taken into account is, that, it is not as if the family of the petitioner migrated directly from Krishna to Khammam District. In between, the family lived for one generation in Nellore District. When the father of the petitioner did not claim, nor was accorded the status of a B.C., in Nellore District, there existed a clear discontinuity, and the petitioner has to succeed, or start from there. In between, the family lived for one generation in Nellore District. When the father of the petitioner did not claim, nor was accorded the status of a B.C., in Nellore District, there existed a clear discontinuity, and the petitioner has to succeed, or start from there. He cannot have a leap over the generation of his father, and trace his origin to his forefathers, who are said to have lived in Krishna District, that too, when no material is forthcoming, to substantial his contention. The respondents 1 and 2 herein have examined the matter objectively, and from the correct perspective. This Court does not find any basis to interfere with such finding of fact 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. It is, however, directed that the petitioner shall not be subjected to any prosecution, if he, himself, or his children do not claim such status in future. 10. There shall be no order as to costs.