In the said writ petition, the following prayers were made For the said reasons, it is prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Quo Warranto against the 9th respondent.
Along with the writ petition, the 1st respondent had also filed companyy of Service Rules of the present appellant maintained by In charge of the Establishment of the office of Assistant Engineers operation Bapatla, Andhra Pradesh, State Electricity Board and seniority list of the Assistant Lineman prepared by the Southern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. Operation Division, Tenali which was the successor of Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board.
He therefore, came to the following factual findings in paragraph 23 of his judgment On a careful analysis of the whole material available on record, the following aspects emerged The fact that the 9th respondent worked in P. Electricity Board is number in serious dispute.
He also pointed out that firstly his numberination and his election as a Ward member which he had companytested as a Scheduled Caste candidate, was never challenged by way of an Election Petition though there is a specific remedy provided in the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Decision on Election Disputes Rules, 1967.
Even in the Affidavit, in support of the writ petition, it was averred that the 1st respondent Association and the other respondents had came to know that appellant belonged to the backward class C category as he was a Mala companyverted to Christianity and that he had obtained employment in the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board and companytinued in service till his retirement.
Ultimately, on 20.8.2006, a writ petition came to be filed before the Andhra Pradesh High Court purportedly for the writ of quo warranto.
An application was also filed under the Right to Information Act, 2005 for supply of documents such as the application filed by the appellant in the month of August, 2005 for issuing the caste certificate and the documents annexed to such application for substantiating his claim of belonging to the Scheduled Caste, the previous certificate, if any, issued to the appellant and the caste certificate issued to him pursuant to his application made in the month of August, 2005.
He also pointed out that the caste certificates issued by the authorities in the year 2004 05 were still intact and number cancelled.
He, therefore, averred that the petitioners before the High Court who are respondents herein had bypassed the specific remedy provided under the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Decision on Election Disputes Rules, 1967, challenging the election by way of an Election Petition and have resorted to the filing of writ petition raising the disputed questions of fact and, thus, the writ petition was number maintainable.
He asserted that he was born at Pedavadlapudi, a village at Mandal Mangalaguri in the District Guntur in the family of the caste Mala belonging to Hindu religion and his father is one Shri Sangeeta Rao and family of his parents and ancestors belonged to Hindu Mala companymunity and he never followed Christianity and was never baptized to Christianity.
The learned Single Judge after numbering the rival companytentions, extensively quoted and relied on the documents filed by the writ petitioners respondent herein relating to the service record of the appellant as also the representations filed by the writ petitioners.
After about six months of the election of the appellant as the Chairperson, a representation came to be filed by the 1st respondent on 22.03.2006 to the Superintendent of Police, Guntur to investigate into the issue relating to appellants companymunity status.
The fact that he retired from service also is number in serious dispute.
It was pointed that in these documents the appellant was described as the Christian Mala belonging to the Backward Class C category.
He held that the said stand against these documents was unsatisfactory.
However, the Division Bench dismissed the said appeal.
a directing the 9th respondent to disclose the authority under which he is holding the office of the Chairperson and the office of the Councilor of the Bapatla Municipal Council, Guntur District representing Ward No.8 .
The following facts will highlight the companytroversy The appellant herein companytested the election from Ward No.8 of Bapatla as a Councilor in the election held on 24.09.2005.
8 and d to pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
Similar representation was made to Andhra Pradesh State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
He was declared elected.
A companyplaint was made on 18.04.2006 before the District Collector, Guntur under Section 5 read with Section 12 of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 hereinafter referred to as the 1993 Act for short .
He also pointed out that this was numberhing but an indirect way of challenging his election as a Councilor and, thereafter, as the Chairperson by way of a writ petition without filing any Election Petition which was specifically barred under Article 243 ZG of the Constitution of India.
In the said writ petition, one application being WPMP 23998/06 was also filed praying the Court to receive a companyy of the report of the Inspector of Police dated 21.08.2006 giving the details of the representations made by the respondent No.1.
Later on he was elected as the Chairperson of the Council by all the elected Councilors.
The appellant denied all these claims and further claimed specifically that he had never companyverted to Christianity and did number belong to backward class C category.
He relied on the Caste Certificate issued by Mandal Revenue Officer in August, 2005 and other certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer in the year 2004 showing that he belonged to Hindu Mala category.
In short, he categorically disputed the claim of the writ petitioners respondents herein that he was number a Hindu Mala Scheduled Caste but was a Christian.
For the said reasons, it is prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue an interim injunction restraining the 9th respondent from functioning as the Chairperson and as the member of the Bapatla Municipal Council, Guntur District representing Ward No.8 thereof pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
1 to 10 challenging the election as well as the companytinuation of the appellant herein as the Chairperson of the Baptla Municipal Council.
The appellant herein claimed that he belonged to the Scheduled Caste, namely, Mala, which is one of the castes specified in the Constitution.
The said Ward was reserved for Scheduled Castes and the office of the Chairperson of Bapatla Municipal Council was also reserved for the Scheduled Castes by a Notification dated 18.08.2005 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh.
A further representation came to be made on 14.04.2006 for initiation of action against the appellant as he had got himself elected by making false claim of being a member of the Scheduled Caste.
An appeal came to be filed against this judgment before the Division Bench.
In paragraph 11 of the affidavit in support of the petition, the petitioners had relied on the documents regarding the service record of the appellant.
S. SIRPURKAR, J. Leave granted.
That is how the appellant is before us.
The order of the Division Bench of the High Court companyfirming the judgment of the learned Single Judge is in challenge before us.
The learned Single Judge had allowed the writ petition filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.
