WP/28924/2026 of NEELAKANTESWAR KONAKONDLA Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 6 October 2026

1. NEELAKANTESWAR KONAKONDLA, S/o K. Bandiah, Age 46 Years Occ SelfEmployed. D. No. 20/209, First Floor, Behind HP Petrol Pump, Near Aditya Residency, Hanumesh Nagar, Guntakal Town and Mandal, Anantapur

2. B. TRIVENI, W/o K. Neelakanteswar Aged 40 Years, Occ House Wife D. No. 20/209, First Floor, Behind HP Petrol Pump, Near Aditya Residency, Hanumesh Nagar, Guntakal Town and Mandal, Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh-515801.

3. AKSHITHA SANVl KONAKONDLA, D/o K. Neelakanteswar Aged 14 Years (Minor), Occ Student Represented by Neelakanteswar Konakondla Natural Guardian D. No. 20/209, First Floor, Behind HP Petrol Pump, Near Aditya Residency, Hanumesh Nagar, Guntakal Town and Mandal, Anantapur

4. GURUTEJ SAI KONAKONDLA, S/o K. Neelakanteswar, Aged 12 Years (Minor), Occ Student Represented by Neelakanteswar Konakondla Natural Guardian D. No. 20/209, First Floor, Behind HP Petrol Pump, Near Aditya Residency, Hanumesh Nagar, Guntakal Town and Mandal, Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh-515801. ...Petitioners

AND

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal Secretary Social Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh- 522238.

2. The District Collector, Ananthapuramu District-515001.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntakal Division, Ananthapuramu District- 515801.

4. The Tahsildar, Guntakal Mandal- 515801. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue Writ, Order or Direction(s) essentially in the nature of Writ of Mandamus Declaring the proceedings of the respondent No. 3 contained in R.C. No. A/2154/2026 Dt. 21-08-2026 rejecting our online applications dated 25 04-2026, seeking issuance of Madari Kuruva (Schedule Caste) community certificate as illegal, arbitrary, whimsical and capricious a resulting in violation of Article 14 and 21 and also in violation of Rule-5 (C), (D) and (E) of AP (SC, ST and BC) issue of community, nativity and date of birth Rules, 1997 and consequently direct the respondent No. 3 to consider our applications afresh keeping in view the procedure prescribed under the act and also probative value of the community certificate issued in favour of the first petitioners father and other relatives and pass appropriate orders forthwith and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant interim direction to respondent no. 3 to consider our applications afresh keeping in view the procedure prescribed under the act and also probative value of the community certificate issued in favour of the petitioner father and other relatives and pass appropriate orders forthwith without reference to impugned proceedings issued by respondent No.3 in RC No. A/2154/2026 dated 21-08-2026 and Pass Counsel for the Petitioners: KARNAM RAMESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents:GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

The Court made the following order:

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned proceedings dated 21.08.2026, whereby the applications of the petitioners seeking issuance of Madari/Madasi Kuruva (Schedule Caste) Community Certificate. It is submitted that the competent authority, under the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Issue of Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificate Rules, 1997, ought to have followed the procedure for verification under Rule 5 before passing any orders.

2. It is the specific case of the petitioners that the 3rd respondent had issued the impugned proceedings by relying upon an initial internal enquiry and a field verification report. It is submitted that Rule 6 would contemplate issuance of a notice under Form-IV and call upon the petitioners to submit their explanation before rejecting or confirming the claim of the applicants. It is further submitted that the findings are based on the internal enquiry and field verification report, without following the procedure as contemplated under the Act and the Rules.

3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioners had submitted a PGRS complaint on 21.08.2024. It is also submitted that the competent authority had rejected the claim of the petitioners for grant of Scheduled Caste certificate vide their redressal mechanism dated 28.08.2024. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were advised to submit an online application, which was submitted on 25.04.2026, and thereafter the impugned proceedings are issued.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

5. As seen from the impugned proceedings, it is evident that the 3rd respondent has not complied with the mandatory and statutory requirements for verification and procedure for verification for issuance of the Community Certificates in toto. Notice under Form-IV is evidently not served on the petitioners.

6. The issue of grant of a Community Certificate is under a statute which governs the procedure for verification and a procedure for cancellation as well. When the statute had prescribed certain procedure to be followed for the purpose of verification of applications, the executive authorities have no other option than to scrupulously follow the procedure as contemplated under the Act and the Rules.

7. This Court is of the considered view that the procedure for verification is evidently not followed, as seen from the impugned proceedings. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings are hereby set aside, leaving it open to the petitioners to submit fresh applications for issuance of the Madari/Madasi Kuruva Community Certificates. Upon receipt of such applications, the respondent authorities shall have to pass appropriate orders strictly by following the procedure for verification and pass subsequent orders as contemplated under the law.

8. With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 07.10.2026 RJS/SZT

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

WRIT PETITION NO: 28924 OF 2026

Dt: 07.10.2026

RJS/SZT