Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Rawa Prasanth Kumar, vs The State Of Ap, on 21 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
***
WRIT PETITION No.21542 of 2019
Between:
Ravva Prasanth Kumar, S/o.Venkateswara Rao,
age 28 years, ST (Koya by caste),
R/o.Ragappagudem Village,
Buttaigudem Mandal, West Godavari District.
... Petitioner
And
$ 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep.by its Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department,
Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.
2. The Agent to Government/District Collector,
West Godavari District, Elluru.
3. The Tahsildar,
Buttaigudem Mandal, Buttaigudem,
West Godavari District.
... Respondents
Date of Judgment pronounced on : 21-04-2023
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes/No
May be allowed to see the judgments?
2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked : Yes/No
to Law Reporters/Journals:
[
3. Whether the Lordship wishes to see the fair copy : Yes/No
of the Judgment?
2
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
* HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
+ W.P.No.21542 of 2019
% Dated: 21-04-2023
Ravva Prasanth Kumar, S/o.Venkateswara Rao,
age 28 years, ST (Koya by Caste),
R/o.Ragappagudem Village,
Buttaigudem Mandal, West Godavari District.
... Petitioner
And
$ 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep.by its Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department,
Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.
2. The Agent to Government/District Collector,
West Godavari District, Elluru.
3. The Tahsildar,
Buttaigudem Mandal, Buttaigudem,
West Godavari District.
... Respondents
! Counsel for petitioner : Sri P.R.K.Amarendra Kumar
^Counsel for Respondents 1 & 2 : G.P. for Social Welfare
^Counsel for Respondent No.3 : G.P for Revenue
<GIST :
>HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred:
3
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION.No.21542 of 2019
ORDER:
The petitioner had been issued a community certificate,
certifying that he belonged to the Koya (ST Community) by the
Tahsildar, Buttaigudem Mandal under the provisions of The
Andhra Pradesh (SC, ST & BCs) Regulation of Issue of
Community Certificates Act, 1993 and Rules 1997 & The
Andhra Pradesh Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993
and Regulations 1996 (hereinafter referred as "Rules") on
25.06.2019.
2. Thereafter, the petitioner had been selected in a
competitive exam, for appointment as a Village Panchayat
Secretary. In the course his verification of his certificates, it
appears that the authority processing the applications for
Village Secretary had required the petitioner to obtain a fresh
Community Certificate. On that basis, the petitioner had applied
to the 3rd respondent, for issuance of a fresh certificate. This
application was rejected by the 3rd respondent by proceedings
bearing ROC.No.1674/2019(J2), dated 28.11.2019 on the
ground that his father belonged to an SC Community while his
mother is ST Community and consequently the petitioner
cannot be granted a certificate certifying that he belongs to the
ST Community of his mother.
3. Aggrieved by the said order of rejection, the
petitioner has approached this Court, by way of the present writ
petition.
4. Sri P.R.K.Amarendra Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner would submit that the petitioner is entitled for the
grant of a certificate, he sought, as his mother belonged to an ST
Community. He would further submit that the authorities
having issued a Community Certificate earlier, cannot resile
from that certificate and claim that a fresh enquiry can be
conducted as and when applications are made for grant of a
fresh certificate. For this purpose, he relied upon the Judgment
of a learned single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra
Pradesh dated 13.04.2016 in W.P.No.38742 of 2015 and a
Division Bench Judgment dated 14.06.2016 in W.A.No.436 of
2016. I am in respectful agreement with the said Judgments
that hold that the authorities having issued a certificate cannot
contend that a fresh enquiry can be conducted in the matter.
[
5. Any person seeking grant of a certificate under the
Act has to make an application under Section 3 along with such
material as is available for obtaining such recognition.
Thereafter, the Competent Authority after satisfying himself
about the eligibility of the application would issue a certificate
under Section 4 of the Act. Where it is found that such a
certificate has been obtained on the basis of false statement or
fabricated documents, the Competent Authority is entitled to
cancel such a certificate, under Section 5 of the Act, after due
enquiry.
6. Rule 16 of the A.P Rules stipulate that the certificate
issued by a competent authority is a permanent certificate.
However, where the holder of the Community Certificate loses
the certificate, he can obtain a duplicate copy of the said
certificate from the Competent Authority on furnishing the
particulars of the original certificate held by him/her. Rule 17
stipulates that on receipt of such application, the Competent
Authority would verify the records available with him and issue
a duplicate certificate within 15 days of the receipt of the said
application.
7. A conspectus of these provisions would show that
once a Community Certificate is issued, under Section 4 of the
Act, the said certificate would be a permanent certificate which
does not require any updation or reiteration from time to time.
The said certificate would be valid and can be produced before
any Authority, for the purposes mentioned in the Act. A
consequence would be that authorities under this Act cannot
seek fresh certification while disregarding the original certificate
issued by the Competent Authority.
8. The scheme of the Act and the Rules preclude the
requirement of obtaining fresh certification from time to time.
Rule 17, which provides for the procedure for issuance of a
duplicate certificate also makes it amply clear that the scope of
enquiry for the Competent Authority, while issuing a duplicate
certificate under Rule 17, is restricted to verifying whether the
original certificate has been issued by the Competent Authority
or not. There is no provision for a fresh enquiry to be conducted
by the Competent Authority to ascertain whether the certificate
has been obtained properly or not.
9. In order to provide for situations where certificates
are obtained by irregular methods, the Act has provided for
Section 5. This provision empowers the Competent Authority to
conduct an enquiry where there is a doubt or apprehension that
a Community Certificate was obtained by unfair means. Except
for this provision, there is no other provision for revisiting a
Community Certificate, issued by the Competent Authority. In
the circumstances, it must be held that there is no provision in
the Act or Rules for the petitioner to be granted a fresh
certificate and there is also no provision which empowers the 3rd
respondent to conduct a fresh enquiry while granting a
certificate under Section 4 of the Act. In fact, there would be no
occasion for the 3rd respondent to conduct a fresh enquiry for
issuing a fresh Community Certificate as such a procedure is
not in accordance with the scheme of the Act and the Rules.
10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There
shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall
stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
____________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
21.04.2023
RJS
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
W.P.No.21542 of 2019
21.04.2023
RJS
