Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.

1. The Writ Appeal arises out of an order dated 29.10.2025 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the Writ Petition No.16607 of 2025 filed by the appellants herein and directing the District Legal Scrutiny Committee (DLSC), Adilabad to verify the social status of the appellant Nos.2 to 7 in accordance with law while ensuring due compliance with procedural safeguards.

2. The appellant Nos.1 to 7 i.e., the writ petitioners before the learned Single Judge prayed for a writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings culminating in the order dated 28.05.2025 issued by the District Collector, Adilabad District, cancelling the Caste Certificates issued by the Tahsildar, Itchoda Mandal, Adilabad, in favour of the appellants as illegal and arbitrary.

3. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge held that the appellants had failed to produce evidence of ST-Lambada status prior to 1950 and the DLSC correctly concluded that the Caste Certificates issued to the appellants were false. The learned Single Judge further held that the appellants’ claim of belonging to the ST-Lambada community was primarily based on ancestral assertions, previous certificates, and purported letters from the All India Banjara Seva Sangh (‘AIBSS’) which were fabricated documents. It was also observed that the appellants’ allegations of mala fide action, Political interference and violation of the principles of natural justice were unsubstantiated and that the appellants had also failed to demonstrate any legal or factual infirmity, arbitrariness or a violation of the principles of natural justice in the order dated 28.05.2025. The learned Single Judge accordingly dismissed the Writ Petition while granting liberty to the DLSC, Adilabad, to verify the social status of the appellant Nos.2 – 7 in accordance with law and upon due compliance with procedural safeguards.

4. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the appellants/writ petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for the respondent Nos.1-5.

5. According to counsel appearing for the appellants, the appellants belong to the ST-Lambada community and are residing in Adilabad District. The appellants claim that the appellant/writ petitioner No.1 has two wives and that both his wives also belong to the ST-Lambada Community. The five children of the appellant No.1 and his first wife as well as the three children of the appellant No.1 and his second wife, also belong to the same community and all the appellants are presently residing at Harkapur Village, Adilabad District. The appellants claim that they are earning their livelihood by cultivating agricultural land at Itchoda Village, Adilabad District and they have also served as the Sarpanch and MPTC in that area. The appellants also claim that their Caste Certificates were renewed from time to time by the Tahsildar in recognition of the appellants belonging to the ST-Lambada community, on the basis of the certificates issued by the AIBSS, Adilabad.

6. The Writ Affidavit states that pursuant to a Complaint made by the respondent No.6 (President of AIBSS, Adilabad District) with regard to the Caste Certificates obtained by the appellants being false, the official respondents issued proceedings which culminated in the order dated 28.05.2025 allowing the complaint of the respondent No.6 and cancelling the Caste Certificates issued in favour of the appellants/writ petitioners. The appellants accordingly approached the Writ Court and filed W.P.No.16607 of 2025 complaining that the Caste Certificates were cancelled due to the political influence of the respondent No.6/President of the AIBSS and without giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellants. The appellants also complained that the official respondents are acting in collusion with the respondent No.6. Therefore, the appellants/writ petitioners prayed for setting aside the order dated 28.05.2025 as being illegal and arbitrary.

7. The respondent No.3/District Collector, Adilabad filed a Counter to the Writ Petition stating, inter alia, that the Government is empowered to call for and examine the record relating to any decision made or order passed by any person in relation to the issuance of Caste Certificates under section 8(1) of the provisions of The Telangana (Schedule Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (‘1993 Act’). The respondents also relied on Rule 9(10) of the A.P. SCs, STs & BCs issue of Community, Nativity and Date of Birth Certificates Rules 1997 (‘the 1997 Rules’) as amended by the GOMs.No.79, dated 24.07.2002 which mandates the Commissioner of Tribal Welfare either to act suo motu or on a written complaint by any person or on request made by an employer/educational institution/appointing authority, to enquire into the correctness of any community, nativity and date of birth certificate already issued and if it is found that the said certificate is obtained fraudulently, to refer the case to the concerned Collector or the Government for its cancellation as per the procedure laid down under section 5 of the 1993 Act.

8. The respondent No.3 also made a specific statement that the respondent No.3 had issued Notice dated 20.03.2025 to the writ petitioner No.1 for appearing before the concerned authority on 24.03.2025 for substantiating his claim. The Counter further stated that the writ petitioner No.1 consequently appeared on 24.03.2025 along with his son and his Advocate and submitted documentary evidence in support of his claim. Hence, there was no infraction of principles of the natural justice on the part of the official respondents before taking the decision to cancel the Caste Certificates of the appellants.

9. We should first deal with the objection taken by the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare with regard to the alternative remedy available to the appellants under the 1993 Act.

10. Section 7 of the 1993 Act provides for “Appeal and Review”. Section 7(2) provides that any person aggrieved by an order passed under section 5 by the District Collector may appeal to the Government within thirty days from the date of publication of such order in the Gazette. The Government may confirm or set aside the order appealed against after giving the appellant an opportunity of being heard subject to the prescribed Rules. Section 7(3) further provides that the Government may on an application received from any person aggrieved by an order passed by the Government under section 5(2) of the 1993 Act may review any such order subject to the application being made within thirty days from the publication of the order in the Gazette. The review may be permitted if the order has been passed under any mistake of fact or law or in ignorance of any material fact. Section 5 of the 1993 Act relates to ‘Cancellation of false Community Certificate’.

11. Section 5(1) authorises the District Collector to act either suo motu or on a written complaint by any person to call for the record and enquire into the correctness of a Community Certificate if the District Collector is of the opinion that the Certificate was obtained fraudulently. Section 5(1) empowers the District Collector by notification to cancel the Certificate after giving the concerned person an opportunity of making a representation. Section 5(2) authorises the Government to exercise the same powers as provided to the District Collector under section 5(1).

12. Hence, the appellants/writ petitioners have the option of taking recourse to sections 7(2) and (3) of the 1993 Act for preferring an Appeal or Review respectively as discussed above. In fact, section 7(4) authorises the Government to stay the operation of the order appealed against or which forms the subject matter of the review, pending disposal of the appeal under section 7(2) or review under section 7(3) of the 1993 Act. The appellants have not shown how the matter fits into any of the exceptions warranting the invocation of the Writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India despite the existence of a statutory alternative remedy under the 1993 Act. The order dated 28.05.2025 passed by the District Collector and Magistrate, Adilabad cancelling the Caste Certificates of the appellants fits into the statutory parameters of section 7(2) of the 1993 Act. This Court is hence of the view that the appellants have failed to explain as to how the Writ Petition was maintainable at the first instance.

13. Even otherwise, the grounds as stated by the learned Single Judge for dismissing the writ petition appear to be uncontroverted. The learned Single Judge found that the writ petitioners’ family had migrated from Maharashtra in 1956 and they had failed to produce any evidence of ST-Lambadi status prior to 1950 before the DLSC. The DLSC consequently determined that the Caste Certificates issued to the appellants were false. The District Collector, Adilabad District, hence rightly cancelled the Caste Certificates of the appellants by exercise of powers accorded under section 5(1) of the 1993 Act read with Rule 9(7) of the 1997 Rules. The impugned order further states that criminal complaints had been filed against the appellant Nos.6 and 7 for fabricating letters on the AIBSS letterhead and forging signatures to obtain ST-Lambadi Certificates. Hence, the Government was empowered to examine and revise the records to cure any illegality, irregularity or impropriety under section 8(1) of the 1993 Act as all the procedural requirements therein had been fully complied with. The impugned order further states that contrary to the allegations made by the appellants in obtaining interim orders from another learned Single Judge on 20.06.2025, the official respondents had complied with the requirement of serving notices on the appellant No.1 who appeared before the concerned authority and submitted explanations and filed enquiries and scrutiny ensured a fair verification process.

14. On the factual aspect, the learned Single Judge found that the appellants’ claim of belonging to ST-Lambadi community relies primarily on ancestral assertion and false certificates as well as fabricated letters from AIBSS and that the order dated 28.05.2025 had been issued after due enquiry, verification of documentary evidence and field-level social status investigation in compliance with the 1993 Act, the 1997 Rules, the GOMs dated 12.05.1997 and the GOMs dated 08.08.2014. The learned Single Judge accordingly held that the appellants/writ petitioners had failed to demonstrate any legal or factual infirmity, arbitrariness or violation of the principles of natural justice in the cancellation of the appellants’ Caste Certificates and therefore dismissed the Writ Petition.

15. The appellants/writ petitioners have not mentioned any instances in the Writ Petition in support of their contention of the violation of principles of natural justice. The writ petitioners’ contention that the official respondents had failed to issue notices for hearing before taking the impugned step is contrary to records. The appellants do not deny that the appellant No.1/writ petitioner No.1 appeared before the concerned authority along with his advocate as well as his son and furnished documentary evidence in support of his claims. This suppression itself would disentitle the appellants/writ petitioners from grant of any equitable relief. The appellants in fact obtained an interim suspension of the impugned order dated 28.05.2025 from another learned Single Judge of this Court on 20.06.2025 on the ground that no notices had been served on the appellants for cancellation of their Caste Certificates.

16. It is also relevant that the order dated 28.05.2025 issued by the Collector and District Magistrate, Adilabad elaborately discusses the individual and family history of the appellants including tracing their ancestry for the purpose of determining whether the appellants belong to the ST Lambadi Community. The order also contains a summation of the evidence obtained from the Complainants for cancellation of the appellants’ Caste Certificates and sets out the Finding and Conclusions arrived at by the District Collector in detail. The findings, inter alia, state that the appellant No.1 migrated from Maharashtra in 1956 and the appellant No.1’s relatives belonging to the BC-Lambadis community, are residing in Maharashtra and that The Constitution (S.T.) Order, 1950 came into force with effect on 26.01.1950 and the Amendment Acts would not apply to those people belonging to particular tribal communities who have migrated after 1950 and have ordinarily been residing in the State of Telangana for a considerable period. The order further states that The Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976 is applicable only to those Lambadis whose ancestors or their offspring are residents of the locality in any part of the State of Telangana as on the date when the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 came into force. The order hence concludes that the appellant No.1 and his family members having migrated from Maharashtra in 1956 are disentitled from claiming ST-Lambadi status in Telangana.

17. The order accordingly found the ST-Lambada Community Certificates issued to the appellants to be false and directed for cancellation of the same under the provisions of the 1993 Act and Rules thereunder, and declared the appellants/delinquents as not belonging to the ST-Lambadi Community.

18. The learned Single Judge found the conclusions arrived at in the order dated 28.05.2025 to be correct and without any satisfactory explanation or rebuttal on the part of the appellants/writ petitioners. The learned Single Judge relied on GOMs dated 12.05.1997 and 08.08.2014 which adopted section 5(1) of the 1993 Act read with Rule 9(7) of the 1997 Rules in the State of Telangana and held that the appellants/writ petitioners had failed to demonstrate any legal or factual infirmity, arbitrariness or violation of the principles of natural justice in the order dated 28.05.2025 passed in exercise of powers accorded under the said provision. We do not find any error in the reasons given by the learned Single Judge in upholding the order dated 28.05.2025 passed by the District Collector and Magistrate, Adilabad cancelling the Caste Certificates of the appellants under the provisions of the 1993 Act and the 1997 Rules and the consequent declaration that the appellants do not belong to the ST-Lambadi Community.

19. As stated above, the appellant No.1 was called for a personal hearing and he attended the same along with his advocate and son. The appellant No.1 represented the case and interest of the appellant Nos.2 – 7 which is not disputed by the appellant Nos.2 – 7. Hence, there was no violation of the principles of natural justice and the District Collector and Magistrate, Adilabad, duly complied with the procedure contemplated under the 1993 Act and the Rules thereunder.

20. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 29.10.2025. W.A.No.1257 of 2025, along with all connected applications, is accordingly dismissed.

There shall be no order as to costs.