IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 11730 of 2009 Between: D. Chandana, D/o. Ravi Kumar Dampuru, R/o. Door No. 15/106, Subedarpet, Milk Dairy, Nellore - 524 001. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Social Welfare (CV-I) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. Rep Deputy Secretary to Government 2 The Collector and District Magistrate, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District, Nellore. 3 The District Level Scrutiny Committee, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District, Nellore.Rep by its Chairman .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the order of the 1st respondent passed in Memo No. 4697/CV-1/09-1 dated 30-5-2009 in refusing to grant stay, pending disposal of the appeal as illegal, arbitrary and consequently stay the order of the 2nd respondent i.e. District Collector & District Magistrate, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District, Nellore passed in R.C.C. 5 (M) 1719/2008 dated 28-3-2009 pending disposal of the appeal before the 1st respondent and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.11730 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner herein claims to have belonged to “Budaga Jangama” caste which is recognized as a “Scheduled Caste” under the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950. Basing on her claim, she was given admission in MBBS Course under “Scheduled Caste” category and as on today she is prosecuting the said course. While so, the 2nd respondent after making due enquiry under A.P. (SC, ST & BC) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificate Act, 1993 passed an order dated 28.03.2009 cancelling the Community Certificate of the petitioner and further directing her prosecution under the provisions of Act 16/1993. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent. Having entertained the said appeal, the 1st respondent by order dated 30.05.2009 rejected the petitioner’s application for grant of stay pending appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. Admittedly, the petitioner is prosecuting the MBBS Course and in case the order of the 2nd respondent is acted upon, her future prospects would be adversely affected. Since the statutory appeal is now pending before the 1st respondent and the order of the 2nd respondent has not attained finality, I am of the opinion that till the appeal is decided by the 1st respondent on merits, the order dated 28.3.2009 ought to have been stayed. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the order of the 2nd respondent dated 28.3.2009 shall not be given effect to so far as the studies of the petitioner are concerned till the Appeal is decided by the 1st respondent. However, the qualification if any acquired by the petitioner in the meanwhile shall be subject to the result of the said appeal. Similarly, there shall also be stay of prosecution of the petitioner on the basis of the order of the 2nd respondent dated 28.3.2009. The 1st respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal following due process of law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________ Justice G.Rohini Date:17.06.2009 mrb