B UDAYA BHASKAR RAO Vs. DIST COLLECTOR NELLORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ or order or direction more particularly a writ of certiorari calling for all the connected records including the impugned order of the first respondent in Rc.C5.3392/96 dated 18-2-1997 and quash the same as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice.

(2.) Sri B. Udaya Bhaskar Rao, the writ petitioner had narrated the factual aspects in detail in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. The first respondent filed a counter-affidavit and the writ petitioner also filed a reply affidavit explaining certain additional facts.

(3.) Sri K.G. Krishna Moorthy, learned counsel representing the writ petitioner had taken this court through the impugned order and would contend that even from the very reading of the order it is clear that the writ petitioner was not afforded with proper opportunity. Learned counsel also had brought to the notice of this Court that on self same allegations as against the writ petitioner a criminal case CC No.463/97 was filed on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore and after conducting the trial, the learned Magistrate recorded acquittal by an order dated 28th November 2003. The learned counsel also pointed out that the said matter was carried by way of Criminal Appeal No.2019 of 2004 on the file of this Court and the same was dismissed by this Court even at the stage of admission by an order dated 24-9-2004. The learned counsel also had pointed out apart from this aspect of the matter in para 4 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition it was specifically pleaded that the family members of the writ petitioner are not having good terms with one Ramaiah and basing on his complaint the then Tahsildar, Nellore issued a notice directing his sister B. Lakshmi Rajyam to appear before him with all original records including the caste certificate issued by the authorities and after conducting a detailed enquiry in the locality and after recording the statements of the elders of the locality the said competent authority came to the conclusion that his father belongs to Yanadi community and the certificates issued in favour of his sister and brothers including the writ petitioner are in accordance with law. The learned counsel pointed out that there is no specific denial to this aspect. The counsel would contend that inasmuch as an enquiry relating to the same family member inclusive of the other family members of the writ petitioner had been conducted in relation to the caste certificate issued by the competent authority and it was held that they belong to Yanadi community and the certificate issued in this regard is in accordance with law, the same question cannot be raised again since it would amount to harassing the petitioner and the family members of the writ petitioner. The learned counsel places strong reliance on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court, the Govt. of A.P., by its Secretary, GAD (Special) Department, Hyderabad and another v. R.K. Ragala, Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) PCR Cell, Hyderabad and another.