Telangana High Court
WA/1800/2004 of A.Rukmini, Vs The Collector AND District Magistrate, on 26 December 2005
MR JUSTICE J.CHELAMESWAR And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P. LAKSHMANA REDDY WRIT APPEAL No : 1800 of 2004 ORDER:- (PER THE HONOURABLE JC,J) Aggrieved by the order, dated 17.11.2004, in W.P.No.2108 of 2004, the un- successful petitioner therein preferred the present appeal. The matter was admitted
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE J.CHELAMESWAR
And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P. LAKSHMANA REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No : 1800 of 2004
ORDER:- (PER THE HONOURABLE JC,J)
Aggrieved by the order, dated 17.11.2004, in W.P.No.2108 of 2004, the un-successful petitioner therein preferred the present appeal.
The matter was admitted on 19.11.2004 and interim order to continue the petitionerin service pending further orders was granted on that day. Hence, theWVMP.No.2804 of 2005.
When the matter is taken up, both the learned counsel for the petitioner and therespondent agreed that the matter could be disposed of finally at this stage.
The appellant joined as Office Assistant in the service of the 5[th] respondentsometime in the year 1981 and now working as Section Supervisor to which post hewas promoted during the course of his service. It appears, that at the time of theemployment, the petitioner submitted a social status certificate, dated 22.10.1977,which indicated that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe. After the petitioner entered intoservice, it appears, some employees association made a representation to therespondents that the petitioner does not, in fact, belongs to Scheduled Tribe, andtherefore, the Certificate, dated 22.10.1977, is required to be cancelled. The 1[st]respondent herein in exercise of the powers under The Andhra Pradesh (SC, ST &BCs) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short “the Act”),passed an order, dated 31.10.2004, canceling the certificate issued in favour of thepetitioner.
A statutory appeal under Section 7 of the said Act is available to the petitioner.However, without availing the said statutory appeal, the petitioner approached thisCourt straightaway by way of the abovementioned Writ Petition. A learned Judge ofthis Court was pleased to dismiss the writ petition on the ground of availability of astatutory appeal an effective alternative remedy and hence, the present writ appeal.
Section 7(2) of the said Act provides for an appeal against any order passed underSection 5 of the Act by the Collector and it reads as follows:
“Any person aggrieved by an order passed under Section 5, by the DistrictCollector may, within thirty days from the date of application of such order inthe Andhra Pradesh Gazette, appeal to the Government and the Governmentmay, after giving the appellant an opportunity of being heard and subject tosuch rules as may be prescribed, confirm or set aside the order appealedagainst.”
It can be seen from the above extract that under the sub-section that an appeal lieswithin thirty days from the date of the publication of an order passed under Section 5of the Act and the period of thirty days is to be reckoned from the date of notificationof the passing of the order. The expression “notification” is defined under Section2(g); to mean that a notification published in Andhra Pradesh Gazette. The order ofthe Collector canceling the said social status certificate is dated 31.10.2004.
The present writ appeal was filed on 19.11.2004. It is brought to our notice, today atthe time of hearing that the order cancelling the certificate of the petitioner was in factpublished in the Gazette on 10.11.2004 i.e., a few days before the date of filing thewrit petition. In fact, a copy of the Chittoor District Gazette, dated 10.11.2004, isplaced by the respondents on file.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had noknowledge of such Gazette publication by the date of filing of the writ appeal.
Pursuant to the decision of the Collector, canceling the caste certificate issued infavour of the petitioner, apprehending action would be initiated against the petitionerby the 5[th] respondent-employer, the petitioner filed the writ petition. As apprehendedby the petitioner, the 1[st] respondent-Collector, communicated the factum of thecancellation of the certificate by his letter, dated 24.11.2004, to the 5[th] respondent totake necessary action.
Conclusion
Having regard to the availability of the statutory appeal, we do not see any reason tointerfere with the judgment under appeal and accordingly, the writ appeal isdisposed of at this stage directing the petitioner to avail the statutory appeal underSection 7(2) of the Act, within a period of thirty days from today.
We further direct the 5[th] respondent to continue the petitioner in servicepending final decision in the appeal proposed to be preferred by the petitioner. Nocosts.
In view of the above directions, we also deem it just and necessary if the appeal ispreferred by the petitioner as directed above, the same shall be decided by theappellate authority, within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of theappeal. In the event, the petitioner does not prefer the appeal within the period ofthirty days as directed above, it is open for the 5[th] respondent to take suchappropriate action in accordance with law, if he so advised.
_____________________
J.CHELAMESWAR, J
___________________________
P. LAKSHMANA REDDY, J