THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA W.P.No. 10586 of 2011 O R D E R: Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 7.3.2011 passed by the District Collector and Magistrate, Prakasam District at Ongole vide which the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled. Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a Junior Assistant on 2.11.1976. At the time of her appointment she had submitted that she belongs to Schedule Tribe, namely, ‘Erukala’ community. The certificate was allegedly issued by the 3rd respondent. Subsequently, a complaint was filed by one Raju, wherein it was pleaded that the petitioner does not belong to ‘Erukala’ community of Schedule Tribe. Accordingly, an enquiry was got conducted and the District Level Screening Committee unanimously resolved to recommend to the District Collector, Prakasam District for cancellation of S.T. Caste Certificate held by the petitioner, which was issued by the Tahsildar, Chirala in 1976. Accordingly, the petitioner was served with a notice on 2.12.2010 by the District Collector, Prakasam District. Along with the notice, the recommendations of the District Level Screening Committee were furnished to the petitioner and she was given an opportunity to make a representation within seven days of receipt of the said notice. Although the petitioner received the notice, but she did not file any representation to the notice issued. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 7.3.2011 was passed by the District Collector and Magistrate, Prakasam District, Ongole accepting the recommendations made by the District Level Screening Committee and canceling the caste certificate obtained by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that before passing the impugned order no show-cause notice was served upon the petitioner and hence grave injustice has been done to her. A perusal of the case file shows that the notice was issued to the petitioner on 2.12.2010. Along with the notice, the recommendations of the District Level Screening Committee were also furnished and the petitioner was also asked to submit her explanation, which she failed to do, and accordingly the impugned order was passed. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the order passed by the District Collector is appealable under Section 7 of A.P. (SC/ST/BC) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act 16 of 1993. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that a notice was served on the petitioner on 2.12.2010 which was accompanied by the recommendations made by the District Level Screening Committee. The petitioner was given time to file her explanation within seven days of receipt of the said notice, but she failed to submit any explanation. Accordingly, the impugned order was passed. Moreover, the order passed by the District Collector is appealable under Section 7 of A.P. (SC/ST/BC) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act 16 of 1993. In view of the above, the present writ petition is not maintainable and it is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner may, however, if so advised, prefer an appeal against the impugned order before the competent authority. No order as to costs. __________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA J. DATE: 19-4-2011. MVB.