ORDER : 1. This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the Respondent-Authorities treating Gudur and Ayodhyapuram Revenue Villages of Gudur Mandal, Mahabubabad (wrongly typed as Mahmubabad) District as Scheduled Area Villages is illegal and contrary to Scheduled Areas (Part-B States) Order of 1950. Consequently, a direction is sought to respondents to treat Gudur and Ayodhyapuram Revenue Villages of Gudur Mandal, Mahabubabad District as non-Scheduled Areas in view of non-mentioning of these two villages as scheduled area villages in Narsampet Taluq in the Presidential Notification (Part-B States) Order 1950, dated 07.12.1950. 2. Originally, the Writ Petition was instituted against 11 respondents. Later Respondents 12, 13 and 14 were impleaded as per Court Order dated 30.07.2025 in IA No. 2 of 2025. 3. The case of petitioners, in brief, is that they are permanent residents of Gudur and Ayodhyapuram Villages of Gudur Mandal, Mahabubabad District, having residential houses and agricultural lands mentioned in the writ affidavit. The extents of land possessed by them is immaterial for the lis, hence not extracted. Previously, these villages were in erstwhile Warangal District and their families have been residing there for more than 100 years. They contend that Gudur and Ayodhyapuram Villages of Gudur Mandal are not notified as Schedule Area villages under the Scheduled Areas (Part-B States) Order of 1950 (for brevity 'the 1950 Order’). However, respondents have wrongly treated these two villages as Scheduled Area. 3.1. It is contended, neither the 1950 Order nor other Notifications have declared these villages as Schedule Area and the said villages are not notified as schedule areas in the list by the 1950 Order. As per the information of petitioners, the President of India is to specify certain areas in Part-A and Part- B States as Scheduled Areas as per V Schedule to the Constitution. Required information was received from Part-A State Governments in time but the same could not be completed in respect of Part-B States. Therefore, the Scheduled Areas (Part-A States) Order of 1950 was published on 26.01.1950 and for Part-B States, Scheduled Areas (Part-B States) Order of 1950 was published on 04.04.1950. The Government of Hyderabad sent proposals for preparation of scheduled areas before bifurcation and a draft was also prepared on 23.03.1950. 3.2. It is contended that Gudur and Ayodhyapuram Villages of Narasampet Taluq were not notified in the 1950 Order dated 07.12.1950. The Government of Hyderabad sent proposals for preparation of scheduled areas before bifurcation and a draft was also prepared on 23.03.1950. 3.2. It is contended that Gudur and Ayodhyapuram Villages of Narasampet Taluq were not notified in the 1950 Order dated 07.12.1950. This non-inclusion is evident not only from 1950 Order but also from the letter of the District Collector, Warangal, dated 08.12.1978 including certain non- schedule villages in the sub-plan area and revision of list of schedule areas by rescinding the Schedule Areas (Part-A States) Order 1950. It is further stated, these two villages were formed before 1930 and they have very less population of STs. as per the census of 1951, 1961, 1971 and 1981. Petitioners have given table of percentage of total population, non-tribal and tribal population and the percentage of STs. It need not be extracted. 3.3. On the strength of the above information, petitioners made several representations to State Government not to treat the two villages in question as schedule area villages. The Government of India, Ministry of Tribal Welfare issued proceedings dated 01.12.2014 to the State Tribal Welfare Department for bifurcation of schedule areas notified under V Schedule to the Constitution in the State of Andhra Pradesh. However, respondent-authorities have not corrected the mistake. While so, petitioners have given representations dated 16.01.2025 and 17.01.2025 requesting not to treat the two villages in question as schedule area villages, however, no orders are passed so far. The respondent-authorities are not allowing registrations by petitioners and are not permitting them to contest in local body elections and Zilla Parishad elections. When applied under the RTI Act, the 9 th respondent replied that no information is available with regard to the two villages in question. 4. The 3rd Respondent - District Collector, Mahabubabad filed counter rebutting the contentions of petitioners. He states that the then Hyderabad State Government issued the Tribal Areas Regulation 1359F (No.III of 1359F). Accordingly, the Tribal Areas Notification 1949 was issued vide Notification No. 2 dated 16.11.1949 (16 th Dai, 1359F). In Part-II of this Notification, 72 villages of Narsampet Taluq including 'Goarur' (Gudur) at Sl.No.68 and 'Radhiapur' (Ayodhyapur) at Sl.No. 69 were notified. He states that the then Hyderabad State Government issued the Tribal Areas Regulation 1359F (No.III of 1359F). Accordingly, the Tribal Areas Notification 1949 was issued vide Notification No. 2 dated 16.11.1949 (16 th Dai, 1359F). In Part-II of this Notification, 72 villages of Narsampet Taluq including 'Goarur' (Gudur) at Sl.No.68 and 'Radhiapur' (Ayodhyapur) at Sl.No. 69 were notified. In furtherance of the letter dated 17.10.1978 of the Secretary to Government, SW Department, proposals vide Rc.No. B6/13046/78, dated 18.12.1978 were addressed to the Secretary to Government, SW Department for correction of names of villages, by the then District Collector, Warangal. In para No.6 it is recorded as follows: "for 'Ayodhyapur' village, in the notification at Sl. No. 69 it was mentioned as 'Radhiapur'. Therefore, by identifying the correct name of the village, 'Ayodhyapur' was mentioned in the list sent by this office." Further, the proposals for correction of name of the village Gudur at Para-8 it is recorded as follows: "In so far as 'Gudur' (Code No. 177) village is concerned, I am to inform that the name of this village was wrongly spelt in the notification at Sl. No. 68 as 'Goarur'. Therefore, by identifying correct name of the village, at Sl.No. 20 of the list sent by this office, it was mentioned as 'Gudur." In Para-13 it is stated- "I am to inform that there are several discrepancies in spelling the names of the scheduled villages in the notification. In Annexure-III of this letter the names of the villages as spelled in the Presidential Notification and the corresponding names with correct spelling are mentioned. It is desirable to correct the names of the scheduled villages in the notification as per corrected names mentioned in Col. No. 7 of Annexure-III of this letter." 4.1. The 1950 Order was issued on the basis of the Tribal Areas Notification 1949. Therefore, it is stated, it is not correct to say that Gudur and Ayodhyapur Villages are not notified as schedule areas. Petitioners based on typographical mistakes are contending that the two villages in question are not notified as schedule areas. 5. Respondents 12 to 14, who have come on record as per the orders of this Court, filed their counter affidavit, more or less on the lines of the counter affidavit of the 3 rd respondent- District Collector. Petitioners based on typographical mistakes are contending that the two villages in question are not notified as schedule areas. 5. Respondents 12 to 14, who have come on record as per the orders of this Court, filed their counter affidavit, more or less on the lines of the counter affidavit of the 3 rd respondent- District Collector. Respondents 12 to 14 filed counter stating that despite Guduru and Ayodhyapuram Villages are in the Jurisdiction of V Schedule of Constitution vide Proceedings Presidential Notification (Part-B States) Order, 1950, dated 07.12.1950 and few clerical mistakes took place by the clerks in printing the names of the villages in the above said order because of that petitioners cannot be said that the above said Villages are not included in the Presidential Order and they do not have right to approach this Court to declare Guduru and Ayodhyapuram Villages as Non-Agency Villages is not valid in the eye of law. 5.1. It is further stated, Part- B 1950 Order, dated 07.12.1950 has categorically stated the above said villages were shown in the Taluq of Narsampet at Sl.Nos.80 and 84 by clerical mistake shown as Guduru and Ayodhyapur and the same is clearly shown that those villages geographically situated in the Jurisdiction of the V Schedule of Constitution and for the past 75 years, villages are in the jurisdiction of V Schedule. The V Schedule is basic structure of the Constitution and the same was upheld by the Apex Court in a catena of judgments including the case of Samata v. State of Andhra Pradesh , (1997) 8 SCC 191 which is the land mark judgment to protect the Schedule Tribe People Rights in the Jurisdiction of V Schedule of Constitution of India. Hence, the contentions of Petitioners are not valid in the eye of law. 5.2. Though the above said villages are in Part-B states, 1950 Order of the Presidential Order, dated 07.12.1950 and geographically situated along with other villages of the Jurisdiction of V Schedule, the clerical mistakes cannot be relied upon by Petitioners to treat the above said villages as non-scheduled area villages. Because, the clerical mistakes are curable and the Hon'ble President of India is only having power to correct the jurisdiction of V Schedule, hence, the present Writ Petition is not maintainable the eye of law. 5.3. Because, the clerical mistakes are curable and the Hon'ble President of India is only having power to correct the jurisdiction of V Schedule, hence, the present Writ Petition is not maintainable the eye of law. 5.3. It is also stated, with regard to Scheduled area clerical mistakes took place in Paloncha Samasthan and the same was claimed by the non-schedule people who are residing in the jurisdiction of V Scheduled of Constitution in Writ Petition No.15688 of 2011 and Writ Petition No.19085 of 2013 and the same was dismissed by the co-ordinate bench of this Court. The said order was upheld in Writ Appeals No. 743 and 744 of 2014, dated 05-07-2023. Aggrieved by the same, non- scheduled people approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court by way of the SLP. No 20490 of 2023 and SLP. Civil. No. 21341of 2023 but no stay was granted in view of the concurrent findings given by this High Court which is squarely applicable for this case. Mere clerical mistakes have been taken place and the same are curable defects without considering the same, the writ petitioners cannot approach this Court. 6. Heard Sri P. Vishnuvardhan Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners; learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare and Sri Prabhakar Chikkudu, learned counsel for Respondents 12 to 14. 7. It is to be noted, V Schedule is the basic structure of the Constitution and the same was upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court in a plethora of cases including Samata vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (supra) , a land mark judgment to protect the rights of the Scheduled Trible People in the jurisdiction of V Schedule to Constitution of India. As stated by the 3rd respondent in his counter, the two villages in question 'Gudur' and 'Ayodhyapur' were included in the 1950 Order, however, with spelling mistakes. For 'Gudur', it is wrongly spelled as 'Goarur' (Sl. No. 68) and for 'Ayodhyapur', as 'Radhiapur' (Sl. No. 69). The District Collector, Warangal, addressed the letter dated 17.10.1978 for correction of wrongly spelled names of villages, pursuant to which proposals dated 18.12.1978 were sent to the Social Welfare Department. Basing on mere clerical/spelling mistakes, which are curable defects, it cannot be said that two villages in question are not included in the 1950 Order and no relief as sought for in this writ petition can be given. 8. The cause of action has arisen in 1950. Basing on mere clerical/spelling mistakes, which are curable defects, it cannot be said that two villages in question are not included in the 1950 Order and no relief as sought for in this writ petition can be given. 8. The cause of action has arisen in 1950. Petitioners under the guise of spelling mistakes in the Presidential Order, cannot now be permitted after lapse of 75 long years to agitate that the two villages in question are to be treated as non- scheduled area villages. That apart, petitioners have not chosen to challenge Presidential Notification (Part-B States) Order 1950 dated 07.12.1950 in this Writ Petition. Without challenging the said 1950 Order, they are not entitled to pray for a declaration that 'Gudur' and 'Ayodhyapur' revenue villages are non-Scheduled Areas. 9. As rightly stated by the 3 rd respondent-District Collector, right from the Scheduled Area Declaration by the Union Government, the primitive Tribal Groups/Tribal Groups dwelling in this area are rest assured to dwell in their place without fear. Basing on the Scheduled Area concept, many developmental activities to the existing Tribal agglomerations have been taken up for Tribals as the villages are published as Scheduled Areas in the Presidential Order 1950 after extensive exercise made. Therefore, the relief sought in this Writ Petition filed after a lapse of 75 years that too without challenging the Presidential Notification (Part-B States) Order 1950 dated 07.12.1950, cannot be granted. The Writ Petition is hit by delay and laches. 10. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. 11. Consequently, miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed.