G VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. DIST COLLECTOR KHAMMAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that falls for determination in this Writ Petition is whether the phrase 'Agency tracts' used in Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Act 108 of 1976 should be confined to the Original tracts or can it be enlarged to other areas taking into account other enactments.

(2.) This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent-Tahsildar, Burgampahad Taluk, to issue a certificate showing that the first petitioner belongs to 'Goud' community of Scheduled Tribe. According to the first petitioner, this certificate will give some benefits for securing preferential treatment in the Common Entrance Examination conducted by the authorities in respect of Regional Engineering College, Warangal. It is averred in the petition that the second respondent issued an order on 12-11-1981 stating that according to G. O. Ms. No. 447 Medical and Health, dt. 10-7-1979, the case of 'Goud' in Burgampahad Taluk does not belong to Scheduled Tribe community. On further representation, the Collector, Khammam stated that the Government issued instructions in G.O.Ms. No. 447, Medical and Health, dt. 10-7-1979 that Scheduled tribe certificate should not be given to non-tribal community of plains i.e. Goud and Gonda etc., even though they reside in Scheduled Areas. It is further stated that distinct tribal community inhabitating in Scheduled Areas, whose traditional occupation is cattle rearing and it has no connection with Goud community etc. of plains area. The 1st petitioner also placed on record a letter addressed to his brother - one Gundla Prabhakara Rao issued by the Tahsildar, stating that 'Goud' caste in Burgampahad Taluk does not come under the Scheduled Caste community. The second petitioner is father of the first petitioner.

(3.) It is contended that once the petitioner belongs to the 'Goud' community and the village Pinapaka is now being the Agency area, the authorities are bound to issue the certificate and the refusal is wholly without jurisdiction and liable to be interdicted. The Tahsildar filed a counter-affidavit contesting the claim. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the contesting respondents, raised broadly two contentions: (1) The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Act 108 of 1976 in the Second Schedule, Part I, Item (7) declares 'Goud' (in Agency tracts)" as Scheduled Tribe community, and the Scheduled Areas (Part A States) Order 1950 mentions only East Godavari, West Godavari and Visakapatnam as Agency areas and hence, no other area can be construed as Agency tracts for the purpose of the above Act. (2) The 1st petitioner does not belong to the 'Goud' Tribe, but he belongs to 'Goud' Caste and hence, the application is not maintainable.