THE DIRECTOR OF TRIBAL WELFARE versus LAVETI GIRI AND ORS.

Citation: [1997] 2 S.C.R. 923 · Decided: 10-03-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

\ 
' 
THE DIRECTOR OF TRIBAL WELFARE 
v. 
LAVETI GIRI AND ORS. 
MARCH 10, 1997 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.] 
Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward 
classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 : 
A 
B 
Caste Certificates--lssua11ce of-Guidelines issued by this Court* in-
C 
dicating that Govemment of India would enact a u11if01m legislation-Draft 
rules fiamed by State of A11dl1ra Pradesh, namely, A.P. Scheduled Castes, 
Scheduled T1ibes and Backward Classes Rules for Issue of Community 
Certificates, 1997-Held, except some variati01~ in the matter of Constitution 
of Committees in Rules 7 and 8 from the guidelines issued, all otller 
provisions are in con/ 011nity with the guidelines issued by this Court-Draft D 
rules are substantially conformable to the directions issued by this 
Court-State Govemment would have the Rules published in State Gazette 
and enforce the Act and the Rules in the light of the law laid down by this 
Court. 
*Director of Tribal Welfare, Govemment of A.P. v. Laveti Giri & Anr., 
[1995] 4 SCC 32 and Kumar Madhuri Patil v.Addl. Commissioner, Tlibal 
Developmen~ [1994] 6 SCC 241, relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: I.A. No. 1of1996. 
IN 
Civil Appeal No. 4545 of 1995. 
E 
F 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.1.84 of the Andhra Pradesh 
High Court in W.A. No. 1040 of 1993. 
G 
P.P. Rao, T. Anil Kumar, D. Mahesh Babu and A. Balaji for the 
Applicant. 
Y.P. Rao for the Respondents. 
H 
923 
924 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1997] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
In Kumar, Madhuri Patil v. Addi. Commissioner, Tribal Developme11~ 
(1994] 6 SCC ~41, this Court had issued guidelines for the officers to issue 
caste certificates to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for the 
B purpose of admission to educatioual institutions and also employment to a 
post or office under the State. When the similar matter, viz. Director of 
Tribal Welfare, Govemme11t of A.P. v. Laveti Giri & Anr., [1995) 4 S<;C 32 
had come up before the Court, this Court reiterated the guidelines in 
paragraph 7 indicating the manner in which the applications were required 
C to be disposed of. In paragraph 8, also it was indicated that the Govern-
ment of India would come forward .with uniform legislation and necessary 
guidelines prescribing penal action against persons who violate such 
guidelines or obtain false caste certificates, which is a fraud on the Con-
stitution and defeat the constitutional objectives. 
D 
The Andhra Pradesh State Legislature has enacted the Andhra 
Pradesh (Scheduled Castes Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) 
Regulation of Issue of Community-Certificates Act, 1993 (16 of 1993) (for 
short, the 'Act') which came into force with effect from September 8, 1993. 
E The above Act came to be made pursuant to a direction issued by the 
Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Act regulates issuance of community 
certificates to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward 
Classes (for short, the 'Dalits', 'Tribes' and 'OBCs'). Section 3 prescribes 
procedure for making application. Section 4 prescribes competent 
F 
authority to issue such certificates. Section 5 prescribes procedure for 
cancellation of the false certificates. Section 6 lays the burden of proof of 
status of caste on the claimant. Section 7 provides for right of appeal and 
review. Section 8 gives power of revision to the Government in the 
prescribed manner. Section 9 gives power to the competent authority to 
avail the appropriate provisions in C.P.C. while conducting the enquiry. 
G Sections 10 to 16 deal \vith the penalties, offences and also the trial and 
consequent punishment etc. thereof. Section 17 bars the jurisdiction of the 
Civil Court to take cognizance of the matters coming under the Act or the 
power to issue any injunction in that respect. Section 18 protects the 
officers who act in good faith. Section 19 gives overriding power over other 
H laws and Section 20 gives the rule making power to the State Government. 
""--, 
DIRECTOR OF1RIBAL WELFAREv. LAVETI GIRi 
925 
// 
The petitioner . has filed the present application for directions or A 
clarifications, since, according to the petitioner, the guidelines issued by 
this Court are required to be worked out within the framework of the above 
Act. Accordingly, by order dated August 20, 1996, this Court directed the 
State Government to make rules in conformity with the Act and th

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.