Judgment : A. Rajasheker Reddy, J. Since both the Writ Appeals arise out of common order dated 11.02.2004 passed in W.P.Nos.29839 & 23244 of 1998, they are heard and being disposed of together by this common order. It is the case of the respondent/writ petitioners that they belong to Scheduled Tribe and were employed in the appellants-Corporation in the posts reserved for Scheduled Tribe. Thereafter in the year 1988, the appellants-Corporation referred their cases along with others to the revenue as well as police authorities for inquiring into their social status, who after conducting enquiry, submitted reports to the effect that they are the daughters of one Chakrapani, a resident of Araku in Visakhapatnam District and they belong to Konda Kapu community which is a Scheduled Tribe. Subsequently in the year 1995, on the complaints that they do not belong to Konda Kapu community, the appellants-Corporation asked them to produce certificates to establish their social status that they belong to Scheduled Tribe. Pursuant to which, they produced the caste certificate which was issued in the name of their father Chakrapani by the then Mandal Revenue Officer, Dumbriguda Mandal of Visakhapatnam District. The appellants-Corporation referred the said caste certificate to the Sub-Collector, Paderu and the District Collector, Visakhapatnam, who after enquiry reported that at no point of time, such a caste certificate was issued in favour of the said Chakrapani. Thereafter, the appellants-Corporation initiated disciplinary proceedings against them by issuing a charge memo. They submitted an explanation to the said charge memo. Not being satisfied with the explanation offered by them, the appellants-Corporation appointed an enquiry officer to go into the said charges and submit his report. The enquiry officer, after conducting enquiry, submitted his report holding the charges proved. The appellants-Corporation accepted the same and imposed the punishment of removal from service. Questioning the same, they filed writ petitions separately. The learned Single Judge, after elaborate discussion, by referring to the relevant provisions and basing on the material available, allowed the writ petitions by setting the removal order passed by the appellants-Corporation. Against the same, the present writ appeals are filed by the appellants-Corporation. Questioning the same, they filed writ petitions separately. The learned Single Judge, after elaborate discussion, by referring to the relevant provisions and basing on the material available, allowed the writ petitions by setting the removal order passed by the appellants-Corporation. Against the same, the present writ appeals are filed by the appellants-Corporation. Learned counsel for the appellants-Corporation contended that the writ petitioners does not belong to Scheduled Tribe, as they were born in Secunderabad, and that the writ petitioners in the attestation forms clearly mentioned that they had born in Secunderabad and they have been staying in Secunderabad since 1952 onwards and their father Potharaju Chakrapani also stayed in Secunderabad within the jurisdiction of Hyderabad District and, in view of the same, as per Clause 2 of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, the writ petitioners claiming Konda Kapu community do not fall under the Scheduled Tribe category. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioners submitted that the Division Bench of this Court in Government of Andhra Pradesh and another Vs. Pagadala Khali Kanthi and another ( 2010(2) ALD 333 (DB)held that the father of the writ petitioners i.e., Potharaju Chakrapani belonged to Scheduled Tribe and it is also held that the grand-father of the writ petitioners also belonged to Scheduled Tribe. It is further submitted that the above-mentioned case was filed by one Pagadala Khali Kanthi, who is no other than the daughter of writ petitioners’ brother in the present case, and the Court clearly held that she belongs to Scheduled Tribe and dismissed the writ petition filed by the State against the order passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal allowing her claim and, in view of the same, the appellants-Corporation cannot contend that the writ petitioners do not belong to Scheduled Tribe. The learned counsel contended that the caste certificate issued, basing on which the writ petitioners got employment, is still valid and no action was initiated for cancellation of the same by competent authority and, hence, any enquiry by the appellants-Corporation into the social status of the writ petitioners is without jurisdiction. He further submitted that the learned Single Judge by relying on several judgments and referring to the relevant provisions held that the appellants-Corporation has no jurisdiction to enquire into the social status of the writ petitioners and rightly set aside the order of removal, as such, no interference is called for. He further submitted that the learned Single Judge by relying on several judgments and referring to the relevant provisions held that the appellants-Corporation has no jurisdiction to enquire into the social status of the writ petitioners and rightly set aside the order of removal, as such, no interference is called for. It is to be seen that as per Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh (S.C., S.T. & B.Cs) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’)the District Collector may either suo motu or on a written complaint by any person, call for the record and enquire into the correctness of the certificate and if he is of the opinion that the certificate was obtained fraudulently, he shall, by notification, cancel the same after giving the person concerned an opportunity of being heard. According to Section 21 of the Act, any community certificate issued by any competent authority before the commencement of the Act shall, unless it is called under the provisions of the Act, be valid and be deemed to have been issued under the provisions of the Act. Under Rule 9 of the Rules framed under the Act, a detailed procedure is contemplated, according to which, on receipt of information, the District Collector shall constitute a Scrutiny Committee and the scrutiny Committee, after following the procedure as mandated under rule 8, shall submit a report to the Collector, basing on which, the Collector may initiate further action. Even as per G.O.Ms.No.282 dated 19.12.1988, it is only the District Magistrate/Additional District Magistrates of the Revenue District who are authorised to cancel the false caste certificate duly following the procedure prescribed and giving an opportunity of being heard to the individual concerned. In this case, the writ petitioners joined the service of the appellants-Corporation in the year 1975 in the vacancies meant for Scheduled Tribe on the basis of the caste certificate issued by the then P.A. to the Collector. It is also an admitted fact that after their appointment, the appellants-Corporation addressed the Social Welfare Department to verify the social status of various employees including the writ petitioners, who in turn entrusted the matter to the CID to conduct enquiry. Simultaneously, at the instance of the appellants-Corporation, the District Collector, Visakhapatnam also conducted enquiry into the said issue. It is also an admitted fact that after their appointment, the appellants-Corporation addressed the Social Welfare Department to verify the social status of various employees including the writ petitioners, who in turn entrusted the matter to the CID to conduct enquiry. Simultaneously, at the instance of the appellants-Corporation, the District Collector, Visakhapatnam also conducted enquiry into the said issue. It is relevant to note that both the authorities, after conducting detailed enquiry, submitted reports to the effect that the writ petitioners belong to Konda Kapu community, a Scheduled Tribe. It is to be noted that mere change of residence does not change the social status of the individual, that too, within the same State. It is the case of the writ petitioners that their father and grand-father hail from Araku Village in Visakhapatnam District and they migrated to Secunderabad and settled thereat, as they got employment in Indian Railways. Mere mentioning in the attestation form as to their residence by the writ petitioners does not in any way mean that the social status of the writ petitioners changes. It is not the case of the appellants-Corporation that the writ petitioners do not belong to Konda Kapu community. All that their case is, since the writ petitioners are residents of Secunderabad, they do not come within the purview of Scheduled Tribes. Further, enquiry was conducted by the revenue and police authorities and reports were submitted stating that the writ petitioners belong to Konda Kapu community and they hail from Visakhapatnam District. As such, mere change of residence does not disentitle the writ petitioners from claiming Scheduled Tribe category. The appellants-Corporation, instead of referring the matter to the Collector, who is competent authority, itself enquired into the matter and passed the order of removal, which according to us, is without jurisdiction. When once it is held that it is beyond the jurisdiction of the appellants-Corporation to enquire into the social status of the writ petitioners, any enquiry held is illegal. We have perused the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Pagadala KhaliKanthi case (1 supra) and found that the case was filed by the daughter of writ petitioners’ brother herein and it is held that the father and grand-father of the writ petitioners herein belong to Scheduled Tribe. We have perused the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Pagadala KhaliKanthi case (1 supra) and found that the case was filed by the daughter of writ petitioners’ brother herein and it is held that the father and grand-father of the writ petitioners herein belong to Scheduled Tribe. In that case, the learned Additional Advocate-General relied upon the report of the District Level Scrutiny Committee that the father of the writ petitioners had migrated to Secunderabad in 1907. When the writ petitioner in the said case, who is held to be Scheduled Tribe, is no other than the daughter of writ petitioners’ brother herein, it can be said that the latter belongs to Scheduled Tribe. Though the social status of the writ petitioner in the said case was cancelled after conducting enquiry, the A.P. Administrative Tribunal as well as this Court held that the writ petitioner therein belongs to Scheduled Tribe. Therefore, the same applies to the case of the writ petitioners herein. The learned Single Judge, after discussing the factual and legal aspects with reference to relevant provisions, rightly allowed the writ petitions. We confirm the view taken by the learned Single Judge. Viewed from any angle, there is no merit in the writ appeals and they are liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, both the Writ Appeals are dismissed while confirming the order of the learned Single Judge. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, orders of interim suspension/stay granted earlier in both the writ appeals are vacated and miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ appeals shall stand disposed of.