IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO:26111 of 2000 Between: P. Ravikumar, S/o. Samivelu, Adi-Andhra Community, R/o. Door No.23-196, Tirupathi Road, Puttur, Chittoor District, Proprietor of M/s. Ravikumar Gas Agency, Puttur, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2Director of Social Welfare Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Sankshema Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 3Commissioner of Social Welfare Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Sankshema Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 4Collector & District Magistrate, Chittoor District. 5Joint Collector, Chittoor District. 6District Supply Officer, Chittoor, Chittoor District. 7Mandal Revenue Officer, Puttur, Chittoor District. 8Mandal Revenu Officer, Narayanavanam Mandalam, Chittoor District. 9Mandal Revenu Officer, VEdurukuppam Mandalam, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.N.NARASIMHA REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of mandamus to set aside order, dated 07.05.2000 passed by respondent No.4. Heard Sri M.N.Narasimha Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The petitioner, who belongs to Mala Community, was appointed as distributor of LPG by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation. A rival claimant who was unsuccessful in getting appointed as LPG distributor made a complaint to the District Supply Oﬃcer, who in turn, referred the same to respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 referred the complaint to the District Level Scrutiny Committee (for short ‘the Committee’) under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Communities) Regulation of Issue of Community Certiﬁcates Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’) and the Rules, 1997 (for short ‘the Rules’) made thereunder. After holding enquiry, the Committee sent it’s report on 24.03.2000. On consideration of the said report, respondent No.4 passed the impugned order cancelling the community certificate of the petitioner. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that the Committee failed to follow the procedure prescribed under Rule 9 of the Rules and, therefore, grave injustice was done to the petitioner. Under Section 7(2) of the Act, any person aggrieved by an order passed under Section 5, by the District Collector, he is entitled to ﬁle an appeal to the Government. Ordinarily, this Court does not entertain a writ petition ﬁled bypassing an eﬀective alternative remedy of statutory appeal and the petitioner having failed to show any extraordinary reason to approach this Court without availing such remedy, I am of the view that the writ petition deserves to be dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the said remedy. Ordered accordingly. The petitioner is permitted to ﬁle appeal within three (3) weeks from today and if such an appeal is ﬁled, the appellate authority (Government) shall entertain and dispose of the same on merits, within a period of three (3) months thereafter. Since the impugned order has been suspended by this Court on 27.12.2000, which is in force till date, interests of justice would be met, if status quo as on today is continued for a period of four (4) months from today. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 8th SEPTEMBER, 2008. kvni