IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25533 of 2007 Between: Mr. K.Kishore Kumar S/o. K. Alfred R/o. Annadanam Choultry Street, Renigunta Village and Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Indian Bank Rep. by the Chiarman & Managing Director, No.66, Rajaji Salai, Chennai. 2 Indian Bank Rep. by Deputy General Manager, Circle Head, Circle Office, No. 10-3-74, PVN Complex, Seshapuram Street, Chittoor. .....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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that cancellation of appointment order of the petitioner vide CO:CTR:VIG:441:2006-07dt. 2-9-2006 of the 2nd respondent is illegal, arbitrary, unlawful, violative of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to Section 7 and other provisions of the A.P. (SC, ST & BC) Regulations of issue of community certificate Act 1993 and Rules 1997 even contrary to claim 9 (G) of the terms and conditions of the appointment order dt. 30-5-1994 and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.VENKATADRI Counsel for the Respondents: MR.AMBADIPUDI SATYANARAYANA The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25533 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner was employed as a Clerk in the 2nd respondent-Bank in the year 1994, against a vacancy reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates. His candidature was considered, on the basis of the caste certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Renigunta, certifying that the petitioner belongs to ‘Adi Andhra’ Caste. In the year 2003, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh (SC, ST & BCs) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’). Through his order, dated 12.07.2006, the District Collector, Chittoor, cancelled the caste certificate of the petitioner. On receiving the communication about the cancellation, the 2nd respondent terminated the services of the petitioner vide proceedings, dated 02.09.2006. The same is challenged in this writ petition. It is contended that aggrieved by the orders, dated 12.07.2006, passed by the District Collector, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Government of Andhra Pradesh and interim stay was granted on 23.10.2006. On behalf of the respondents, a counter affidavit is filed, stating that the termination of the services of the petitioner occasioned, on account of the cancellation of the caste certificate and that the order of stay granted by the Government is subsequent to the orders of cancellation. Heard Sri B.Venkatadri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.Satyanarayana, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is not in dispute that the appointment of the petitioner was against a vacancy reserved for schedule caste candidates. The caste certificate, on the basis of which, the petitioner was appointed as Clerk in the 2nd respondent- Bank, was cancelled by initiating the proceedings under Section 5 of the Act. Had it been a case, where the petitioner moved swiftly, availed the remedy of appeal, and obtained the order of stay, things would have been different altogether. He took nearly three months’ time to approach the appellate authority, to obtain the order of stay. In the meanwhile, the 2nd respondent swung into action and terminated the services of the petitioner. On behalf of the petitioner, it is pleaded that the order of cancellation does not accord with the settled procedure, inasmuch as no opportunity was given to explain. This Court would have certainly gone into the said question, but for the fact that the eligibility or otherwise of the petitioner to be continued in service would depend upon the outcome of the appeal pending before the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Left to itself, the 2nd respondent did not record any fining on the validity of the caste certificate. At the most, it has only taken consequential action, as provided for under Section 11 of the Act. The interests of the petitioner can be protected, by directing the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal within a stipulated period. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh to pass final orders in the appeal preferred by the petitioner, against the order, dated 12.07.2006, passed by the District collector, Chittoor, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Registry is directed to mark a copy to the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh. In case, the appeal is not disposed of, as directed above, it shall be open to the petitioner to approach this Court with appropriate prayer. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 17.03.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25533 of 2007 Date: 17.03.2008 JSU