IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO.1357 OF 2009 Dt.20.11.2009 Between: Thota Sankar … Appellant And The Convenor of District Level Scrutiny Committee and District Revenue Officer, District Collector’s Office Machilipatnam, Krishna District and others … Respondents Counsel for the Appellant: Sri J.M. Naidu Counsel for Respondent No.1: G.P. for Social Welfare Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3: Sri R.S. Murthy THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.1357 OF 2009 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Anil R. Dave) It was reported to the respondent authorities that the appellant – petitioner had fraudulently obtained a certificate that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe community. When the aforestated information was given to the respondent authorities, a notice dt.29.10.2009 was issued to the appellant – petitioner calling upon him to attend the enquiry so as to ascertain whether the certificate, which was given to him, was correct. The aforestated notice was challenged in Writ Petition No.23840 of 2009 by the present appellant. After hearing the concerned Advocates, the petition has been rejected. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant – petitioner has submitted that respondent No.1 has no jurisdiction to issue the notice dt.29.10.2009 and enquire into the matter. If it is so, it would be open to the appellant to raise the objection in the enquiry proceedings. We are sure that if such an objection is raised, the same shall be considered by the concerned authority. We do not find any substance in the appeal, because the appellant has challenged the initiation of enquiry and no final order has been passed in pursuance of the said enquiry and, therefore, in our opinion, interference in such enquiry, is not called for at this stage. The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Appeal, W.A.M.P. No.2848 of 2009 filed by the appellant – petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. ______________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ ______________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 20.11.2009 bnr Note: Issue C.C. by 24.11.2009. (B.O) bnr