P RAMAKRISHNA RAO Vs. OSMANIA MEDICAL COLLEGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the question of caste to which the petitioner belongs is involved. He has completed his MBBS. Course as a candidate belonging to 'Konda Kapu' which finds place in the list of Presidential Order as a Scheduled Tribe. In respect of two of his brothers, who too are similarly involved regarding their caste to be established, two writ petitions are pending. In their case, however, the Writ Petitions were filed during their prosecution of MBBS Course itself.

(2.) So far as the petitioner's father's case is concerned, when he was in service in the Department of Central Excise, a question arose as to which caste be belonged. There was an inquiry in that behalf and the then District Collector, on an inquiry, held that he belonged to 'Konda Kapu' a Scheduled Tribe. He was, therefore, appointed to the post reserved for Scheduled Tribes and his appointment was held to be a proper one. Now he is said to have retired from service. However, when proceedings were sought to be initiated by the successor Collector in respect of his sons, it has transpired that there was no cogent material on which the predecessor Collector clarified that the father belonged to a Scheduled Tribe. No doubt, he directed the Director of Social Welfare to forward the material sent by him in this behalf for due consideration by the Government. But that was not forwarded and unfortunately it is lying with the Directorate even to this day, for over seven years. Be that as it may, the question is whether the benefit of caste already determined in respect of the father of the petitioner herein should ipso facto be extended to the sons or whether the petitioner should be directed to establish his caste de hors the certificate issued in favour of his father. Since the other writ petitions, W.P. Nos. 16476 / 84 and 8884/87, are pending in this Court and inasmuch as this aspect being rather important as it involves the careers of three persons, I feel it just and proper that all the three writ petitions may be heard together by a Division Bench of this Court.

(3.) This Writ Petition comes before us on an order of reference made by our learned brother Seethararn Reddy, J. in his order dt.28-7-1987. The other Writ Petition viz., W.P. Nos. 16476 / 84 and 8884 / 87 filed by two brothers of the petitioner were pending before this court. They also raised substantially similar questions that arise for consideration in this Writ Petition.The learned single Judge directed that this Writ Petition might be heard along with W.P. Nos. 16476 / 84 and 8884 / 87. These two Writ Petitions were at that time in the hearing list of P. A.Choudary, J. He heard and disposed of those Writ Petitions by order dated 2-11-1987 without waiting for the matter being heard by a Division Bench. Petitioners therein filed Writ Appeal Nos.884 and 885 of 1988. A Division Bench of this court dismissed those Appeals by order dt.7-6-1988. The matter is now pending before the Supreme Court in Civil Appeals. As mentioned earlier, substantially the same questions arise in this Writ Petition also.