Isabella Mariam

The Andhra Pradesh High Court set aside a government order denying an individual Scheduled Tribe status, finding that when a person’s existing ST claim is questioned, the authority disputing it must prove that the individual does not belong to the notified tribe. The petitioner asserted that he was from the Konda Kapu community, which is recognised as a Scheduled Tribe under the Presidential Order, 1950, and relied on entries in school records and revenue documents, along with a permanent caste certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer.

The writ petition arose from proceedings initiated by social welfare authorities questioning the Scheduled Tribe status of the petitioner, who claimed to belong to the Konda Kapu community. The petitioner asserted that his family had been residents of the Agency areas of the present East Godavari District for generations and that his caste had consistently been recorded as Konda Kapu (Scheduled Tribe) in school and revenue records. The dispute began after an inquiry by the Tribal Welfare Department resulted in a communication to an agricultural university stating that the petitioner did not belong to the Konda Kapu community.

Also Read: Compensatory Allowances Must Be Included For Overtime Wage Calculation Under Section 59 Factories Act: Supreme Court

Following an earlier writ petition, liberty was granted to the District Collector to conduct a fresh inquiry into the petitioner’s social status. The matter was referred to the District Level Scrutiny Committee, after which the District Collector cancelled the petitioner’s community certificate. The State Government, acting as the appellate authority, confirmed the cancellation.

The petitioner challenged both orders, contending that statutory requirements under the Andhra Pradesh (SCs, STs & BCs) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 and the Rules of 1997 were violated, that the Scrutiny Committee report was not furnished, and that documentary evidence supporting his claim was ignored. The respondents relied primarily on old land records and genealogical details indicating Kapu (OC) status of certain ancestors.

The Court examined the manner in which the inquiry into the petitioner’s social status was conducted and noted procedural deficiencies. It recorded that “the matter was referred to the Chairman, District Level Scrutiny Committee to inquire into the social status of the petitioner” and that the Committee examined several documents, including land records from 1938 and death extracts of relatives, before concluding against the petitioner.

The Court observed that “none of the parties filed the recommendations of the District Level Scrutiny Committee before this Court to look into the observations made by the said Committee” and further noted that the appellate authority relied substantially on the inquiry conducted by the Commissioner of Tribal Welfare.

On the issue of natural justice, the Court stated that “the inquiry of the District Level Scrutiny Committee is behind the back of the petitioner and despite the request of petitioner, the report of the Committee has not been furnished to him”. It further recorded that reliance on such a report “constitutes an infraction of the salutary principles of natural justice”.

With respect to inter-caste marriages, the Court referred to earlier precedents and noted that “in case of inter-caste marriage, it is well established that the children get the social status of the father”. It observed that the authorities placed undue emphasis on marriages within the Kapu (OC) community while disregarding documentary material showing recognition of the petitioner’s paternal lineage as Scheduled Tribe.

The Court also examined documentary evidence produced by the petitioner, including school transfer certificates and caste verification records, and observed that “in all the land record documents, his caste was mentioned as Konda Kapu”. It further noted that earlier proceedings under land transfer regulations had recognised the petitioner’s paternal grandmother and father as tribals belonging to the Konda Kapu community.

On the burden of proof, the Court recorded that “the burden of demonstrating that a candidate does not belong to the Scheduled Tribe community is on the authority, who disputes the social status” and found that such burden had not been discharged in the present case.

Also Read: Delay Alone Cannot Defeat Compassionate Appointment When Caused By Lack Of Awareness And Financial Distress Is Established; Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Court directed that “the Writ Petition is allowed” and ordered that “the order of the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms.No.69, Social Welfare (CV.2) Department, dated 19.06.2009 is set aside. Consequently, the order of the 2nd respondent in Roc.No.C5(M)/1268/2001, dated 15.09.2005 is also set aside. There shall be no order as to costs” and recorded that “the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed”.

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Petitioner: Sri G. Chandra Shekhar Rao, Advocate

Case Title: Atlapakala Rama Krishna v. Government of Andhra Pradesh (Social Welfare Department & Ors.)
Neutral Citation: APHC010079012009
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 19409 of 2009
Bench: Justice K. Sreenivasa Reddy