Kapu or Konda Kapu? Andhra Pradesh HC ends man’s 20-year battle over ST status

Caste certificate cancelled in 2005

According to the petitioner, he and his family members belonged to the Konda Kapu caste, which is listed as an ST community under the Presidential Order, 1950, and are residents of agency tracks (tribal areas) of the present East Godavari District.

He submitted that throughout his educational career, he was considered a member of the Konda Kapu (ST) community, except while he was studying BSc Agriculture, where, based on an inquiry, the director of tribal welfare, in September 2001, informed the Acharya N G Ranga Agricultural University that the petitioner does not belong to the Konda Kapu community.

Appeals by the petitioner culminated in the 2005 order by the district collector cancelling his caste certificate. His appeal before the department was also rejected in 2009.

The respondents held that the Pattadar Pass Book, issued in favour of Atapakala Bennaswami, the petitioner’s father, records the caste as Konda Kapu (ST), the particulars obtained from the Sub- Registrar, Prathipadu, revealed that the petitioner’s family members belonged to Kapu (OC or open category).

While the petitioner was issued notice on a number of occasions to attend before the respondent with all recorded documentary evidence to support his caste claim, the petitioner did not file any written arguments in response to the notices, they argued.

‘Burden on authority that disputes the social status’

The court, after hearing the contentions of both parties, noted that mere non-adducing documentary evidence on behalf of petitioner during inquiry either before the committee or the second respondent, is not a ground to reject the caste claim of the petitioner. “The burden of demonstrating that a candidate does not belong to the Scheduled Tribe community is on the authority, who disputes the social status,” the judge remarked.

Reaffirming a legal precedent in the Syamala Rama Raju Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh Social Welfare Department case before the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, the court held that “it is well-established that children get the social status of the father. When such is the case, Writ Petitioner, being his son, would get the same social status of his father.”

Justice Reddy concluded that the orders from 2005 and 2009 were liable to be set aside. The writ petition was allowed, providing significant relief to the petitioner whose status had been under dispute since 2001.