BOKKAM RAMAM Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT VISAKHAPATNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 16-7-2001 passed in WP No.4824 of 1995 by the learned single Judge in dismissing the writ petition filed seeking to quash the impugned order RC No.9934/1992/TW, dated 25-2-1995, whereunder the social status certificate issued in favour of the appellant herein as Scheduled Tribe has been cancelled by the 1st respondent.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellant would contend that though the social status certificate was issued prior to the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short, 'the Act') coming into force, as per Section 21 of the Act, any certificate issued prior to the Act coming into force is deemed to have been issued under the provisions of the Act, as such the procedure contemplated under the Act has to be followed for cancellation of the certificate. It appears the Act came into force with effect from 16-5-1997 whereas the impugned order has been passed on 25-2-1995. According to the learned Counsel the impugned order is passed basing upon the report of the Mandal Revenue Officer, wherein the purported admission of the appellant was recorded. It is contended that though before the Mandal Revenue Officer the appellant had admitted that he belongs to "Koppala Velama caste which comes under BC 'D', but the fact that he refused to sign on the statement would categorically go to show that no such admission was made in such a situation. It is well-settled principles of law that as per Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, facts admitted need not be proved. Furthermore, this plea was not taken before the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case held thus:

(3.) The Apex Court in Director of Tribal Welfare Government of A.P. v. Laveti Girl AIR 1995 SC 1506, has categorically held that when once the social status certificate is cancelled, the consequence arising out of the same shall automatically ensue, and no further opportunity of hearing is necessary. The impugned order cannot also be said to be illegal or in violation of the principles of natural justice in view of Section 11 of the Act which reads thus: