Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 240 (AP)

Siruvati Sai Kiran v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2021-04-04

M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

body2021
ORDER : 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, declaring the action of the respondents in insisting to produce the community certificate of the petitioner, without considering the community certificates of his father, grandfather as illegal, improper, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to admit the petitioner in the third respondent/educational institution without insisting for community certificate. 2. The facts of the case in nutshell are as follows: 3. The petitioner has pursued his school studies from I to V class at Jeevana Jyothi English Medium High School, Nandikotkur, Kurnool District and thereafter, studied at Krishnaveni English Medium High School, Nandikotkur, Kurnool District from VI to X Classes. The petitioner passed S.S.C with A+ Grade with GPA of 9.8 with Hall Ticket No.1920116660. For continuing his further studies, the petitioner applied for admission into six years integrated B.Tech programme-2019 in Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies, Kadapa (for short “RGUKT”) with application No.RAPUG19122888 under Scheduled Caste Category. 4. The petitioner contends that he belongs to Schedule Caste (Beda Budaga Jangam Caste). The petitioner filed Community Certificates issued in favour of his father, grandfather and paternal aunt by the competent authority in his support to establish that he belongs to Beda Budaga Jangam Community which is recognized as Scheduled Caste. It is submitted that, though the petitioner applied for community certificate through “Mee Seva”, the same was not issued as it is pending before the Tahsidlar concerned. 5. While the matter stood thus, the staff of the third respondent informed the petitioner on 05.07.2019 that he was selected. It is alleged that the staff of the third respondent informed the petitioner to be present with certificates along with community certificate or alternatively Court order. 6. The petitioner contends that, in similar circumstances, when Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Authorities requested for producing of community certificates, the candidates produced certificates their parents instead of them. It is alleged that the staff of the third respondent informed the petitioner to be present with certificates along with community certificate or alternatively Court order. 6. The petitioner contends that, in similar circumstances, when Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Authorities requested for producing of community certificates, the candidates produced certificates their parents instead of them. On that, all the petitioners who are minors filed W.P.No.36009 of 2017, wherein the learned single Judge of High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and State of Hyderabad in WPMP No.44735 of 2017 in W.P.No.36009 of 2017 dated 07.11.2017 passed the following order: i. This Court is of the view that as long as the Social Status Certificates issued under the provisions of the A.P. (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 in favour of petitioners? fathers are subsisting having regard to Section 21 of the Act, denying admission to petitioners prima facie, is arbitrary and balance of convenience is in favour of petitioners, who are seeking admission into sixth class in the School run by the 3rd respondent. ii. Hence, there shall be interim direction to respondents 2 and 3 to finalise the admission of petitioners forthwith, basing on the community certificates held by their fathers and admit into 6th class in 3rd respondent school and the admission of petitioner is subject to further orders in this behalf. 7. The petitioner contends that the same principle is applicable to the case of this petitioner and thereby, he is entitled to claim the relief sought in the writ petition i.e. a direction not to insist this petitioner to produce community certificate and to admit him based on the community certificates of his father, grandfather and paternal aunt and prayed to issue a direction as stated above. 8. The respondents did not file any counter affidavit. 9. During hearing, Sri R. Ramanjaneyulu, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, when a community certificate was issued to the petitioner’s father and grandfather, the same is sufficient to admit the petitioner in the third respondent educational institution under Reserved Category. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, when once a certificate was issued, it is binding upon the respondents in view of Section 21 of Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short “the Act”). Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, when once a certificate was issued, it is binding upon the respondents in view of Section 21 of Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short “the Act”). 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in The Joint Seat Allocation Authority v. Ebhuthi Venkata Sai Krishna, W.A.no.390 of 2020 dated 17.02.2021 is not binding on this Court, as it was decided without affording an opportunity to this petitioner and that, the learned counsel for the petitioner therein is going to file an appropriate application for review of the judgment before the Division Bench. It is also contended that the G.O issued by the State Government is having retrospective effect, but not prospective effect and thereby, admission to this petitioner cannot be denied and requested to issue a direction as requested above. 11. Whereas, learned Government Pleader for Education would contend that the issue is covered by the judgment of the Division Bench in The Joint Seat Allocation Authority v. Ebhuthi Venkata Sai Krishna (referred supra) and that the Government Order is having retrospective effect and requested to dismiss the writ petition, following the principle laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment referred supra. 12. Undoubtedly, the petitioner studied S.S.C and applied for admission into six years integrated B.Tech programme-2019 in Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies, Kadapa with application No.RAPUG19122888 under Scheduled Caste Category. Copy of application form is placed on record and fee payment receipt is also placed on record to establish that this petitioner secured admission into six years integrated B.Tech programme in RGUKT under Scheduled Caste quota, claiming that he belongs to Beda/Budaga Jangam Community which is recognized as Scheduled Caste in the State of Andhra Pradesh. 13. If the petitioner really belongs to Scheduled Caste, he is entitled to claim reservation. The petitioner allegedly belongs to Beda Budaga Jangam Community, which is a Scheduled Caste, as per Annexure-I of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes - Issue of Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificates Rules, 1997. (for short “the Rules”) Column 1 Specified Community Column 2 Competent Column 3 Jurisdiction Authorities (1) (2) (3) 1. The petitioner allegedly belongs to Beda Budaga Jangam Community, which is a Scheduled Caste, as per Annexure-I of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes - Issue of Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificates Rules, 1997. (for short “the Rules”) Column 1 Specified Community Column 2 Competent Column 3 Jurisdiction Authorities (1) (2) (3) 1. BC Group:- A/B/C/D. All communities referred by the Government of Andhra Pradesh belonging to Backward Class, A/B/C/D Groups. All M.R.Os in the State not below the rank of a Dy. Tahsildar. Within the territorial Jurisdiction of a Mandal. 2. Scheduled Caste: 1. Adi Andhra 2. Adi Dravida 3. Arundhatiya 4. Dom, Dombara, Paidi, Pano 5. Madiga 6. Mala 7. Mala Dasari 8. Mala Dasu 9. Mala Sale, Netkani 10. Manne 11. Panchama, Pariah 12. Relli All M.R.Os. in the State not below the rank of Dy. Tahsildar Within the territorial Jurisdiction of a Mandal. 3. Scheduled Caste: 1. Anamuk 2. Aray Mala 3. Arwa Mala 4. Bavuri 5. Beda (Budaga) Jangam All Tahsildars in the Districts specified in column 3 not below the rank of Deputy Tahsildars With in the Territorial Jurisdiction of a Mandal in the Districts of Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy/ Mahabubnagar, Adilabad, Nizamabad, Medak, Karimnagar, Warangal, Khammam and Nalgonda. 14. Thus, Beda Jangam / Budaga Jangam Community is classified as Scheduled Caste as per Clause 3(5) in Column No.1 of the table referred supra. All the Tahsildars in the State not below the rank of Deputy Tahsildars are competent authorities to issue caste certificate. 15. The Rules were passed in the common State of Andhra Pradesh. But, after bifurcation of the State, there is a lot of change in the schedule annexed to Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act. The caste certificate issued by the revenue officials in favour of the father of the Petitioner, show that he belongs to Budga Jangam Community. But, it is to be noted here that, in Fifth Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, Beda /Budga Jangam Community has been omitted from the list of SC category. The caste certificate issued by the revenue officials in favour of the father of the Petitioner, show that he belongs to Budga Jangam Community. But, it is to be noted here that, in Fifth Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, Beda /Budga Jangam Community has been omitted from the list of SC category. It would be appropriate to extract the same, which is as under:- “THE FIFTH SCHEDULE (See section 28) In the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950,–– (1) in paragraph 2, for the figures “XXIV”, the figures “XXV” shall be substituted; (2) in the Schedule,–– (a) in PART I relating to Andhra Pradesh, item number 9, shall be omitted; (b) after Part XXIV, the following Part shall be inserted, namely:–– “PART XXV.–– Telangana 1 . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . 9. Beda (Budga) Jangam (omitted) 10 . . . . . . . 11 . . . . . . . 12 . . . . . . .” 16. Relying upon the said entry, a Division Bench of this Court vide its Order, dated 21.01.2021, in W.P. No. 22208 of 2020, rejected the request of the Petitioner therein holding as under: “Presidential Order omitting „Bedajangam? community from Scheduled Caste category is placed on record. In view of the said fact, no relief may be extended to the petitioner in the writ petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.” 17. Further, on perusal of G.O.Ms. No. 104, dated 05.09.2019, issued by Social Welfare (CV.1) Department would show that the Government after examining the matter in detail, decided to appoint a One Man Commission headed by a senior officer belonging to Indian Administrative Service to examine the following issues:- “I. Inclusion of Beda / Budga Jangam Community people under Scheduled Castes category. II. . . . . . . . III. . . . . . . . IV. . . . . . . . V. . . . . . . .” 18. II. . . . . . . . III. . . . . . . . IV. . . . . . . . V. . . . . . . .” 18. Taking into consideration of the change in Schedule-V as per Section 25 of the A.P. Reorganization Act, the Division Bench of this Court in The Joint Seat Allocation Authority v. Ebhuthi Venkata Sai Krishna (referred supra) held that the petitioner is not entitled to claim admission on the basis of the certificate of his father etc., while setting aside the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in W.P.No.19027 of 2020 dated 20.10.2020, as Beda Jangam/Budaga Jangam Community is not included in the Scheduled Castes category in the State of Andhra Pradesh. 19. However, the Rules are not amended suitably. But, in terms of the Andhra Pradesh State Reorganization Act, 2014, the petitioner is not entitled to claim the benefit. Even the petitioner intended to take advantage of the provisions of the Act, the concerned competent authority specified in Column No.3 of the table must be impleaded as a party to the writ petition and claim relief against the competent authority for failure to issue certificate under the Act. But, in the present case, the claim of this petitioner is limited i.e. only to direct the respondents not to insist production of the community certificates of the petitioner, without looking into the community certificates of his father, grandfather as illegal and violative of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to admit the petitioner in the third respondent/educational institution without insisting for community certificate. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner is limited to direct the respondents not to insist production of community certificate and consequential order. 20. Rule 19 of the Rules is the relevant provision which deals with provisional admission/appointment. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner is limited to direct the respondents not to insist production of community certificate and consequential order. 20. Rule 19 of the Rules is the relevant provision which deals with provisional admission/appointment. According to it, if the last date for admission to an educational institution/appointment to an office/post is getting expired, and there is delay in finalising the enquiry and issuing of Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificate by the Competent Authority, then the Competent Authority may inform the Principal of the Educational Institution/ appointing authority/employer or such other authority, competent in this behalf, to admit/appoint the candidate, on the basis of the declaration given by the candidate/parent/guardian before the Competent Authority, while applying in Form I/II as per Rule 5, for the issuance of the Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificate. Such admission or appointment shall only be provisional and valid for three months from the date of the communication by the Competent Authority to the Principal/employer/appointing authority as the case may be, and shall cease to be valid after the issuance of the community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificate by the Competent Authority, based on the conclusion of the enquiry. 21. It is clear from Rule 19 of the Rules that, admission is permitted provisionally on the basis of declaration of the candidate, but it will be in force for a period of three months from the date of communication by the Competent Authority to the Principal, and shall cease to be in force immediately after the issuance of the Community Certificate by the Competent Authority. Therefore, the interim order passed by the learned single Judge in WPMP No.44735 of 2017 in W.P.No.36009 of 2017 dated 07.11.2017 is in the nature of interim direction akin to Rule 19 of the Rules. But, the interim order passed by the learned single Judge is for limited purpose of provisional admission and it is not binding on this Court. Moreover, in view of Rule 19 of the Rules, such direction can be issued only for limited period of three months, but not beyond that. 22. In the instant case on hand, “Beda Jangam/Budaga Jangam Community” was not recorded in Schedule-V after the advent of A.P. State Reorganization Act, 2014. Moreover, in view of Rule 19 of the Rules, such direction can be issued only for limited period of three months, but not beyond that. 22. In the instant case on hand, “Beda Jangam/Budaga Jangam Community” was not recorded in Schedule-V after the advent of A.P. State Reorganization Act, 2014. Till inclusion of Beda Jangam or Budaga Jangam community in the list of Scheduled Caste, no certificate be issued declaring any person belonging to Beda Jangam or Budaga Jangam in Scheduled Caste in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, claiming a direction against the respondents not to insist caste certificate even after two years is contrary to Rule 19 of the Rules. Rule 19 permits provisional admission based on declaration, on information by competent authority only. But, the provisional admission is not permissible based on father or grandfather caste certificate. The basis for the contention of this petitioner is that, the caste certificates of petitioner’s father, grandfather and paternal aunt were submitted along with the application to establish that this petitioner belongs to Budaga Jangam Community which is classified as Scheduled Caste. But, the candidate who seeks admission into the college has to submit his caste certificate for admission into college, but not the caste certificate of his father or grandfather or any other family member. Until a certificate is produced, admission of this petitioner can be treated as provisional admission in terms of Rule 19 of the Rules. 23. Rule 19 of the Rules is incorporated only to enable the person to get admission in educational institution or to get appointment in government service, based on their declaration without insisting a certificate for a period of three months. It is for the benefit of genuine members of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe or Backward Classes that they shall not be deprived of their benefits of reservation during pendency of enquiry for issue of caste certificate by the competent authority under the Rules. If, for any reason, a blanket order is passed by the Courts exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, there is a possibility of abuse of process of law to get admission and appointments, based on the caste certificates of their father or grandfather, for the simple reason that, by the time of issue of caste certificate, parents caste may be in the schedule. But, due to subsequent amendments, there is a possibility of deleting such caste from the Schedule. In such case, certainly it would amount to conferring undue benefit on the person, who does not belong to scheduled caste, scheduled tribe or backward classes as on the date of alleged admission into educational institutions or public services. This Court cannot issue any direction based on the claim of this petitioner contrary to Rule 19 of the Rules to direct the respondents not to insist production of caste certificate of the student and consequential direction. Therefore, I find no merit in the writ petition and the same deserves to be dismissed. 24. One of the contentions addressed before this Court is that, the Division Bench of this Court in The Joint Seat Allocation Authority v. Ebhuthi Venkata Sai Krishna (referred supra) passed an order without affording an opportunity to this petitioner and intended to file a review petition. But, as on date, the order of the Division Bench is final and it is binding on the learned single Judge of this Court. Therefore, the intention of the learned counsel for the petitioner to file a review petition in the judgment referred supra is not a ground to issue such direction as claimed by this petitioner and the same is hereby rejected. 25. In view of my foregoing discussion, I find no merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed, while making it clear that the admission of the petitioner can be treated as a provisional admission in terms of Rule 19 of the Rules. 26. In the result, writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 27. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand dismissed.