IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16883 of 2004 Between: Dr. Durgesh Nandini, W/o. C. Rajendra Prasad, Reader in Hindi in Osmania University, R/o. 4-2-937, Ram Koti, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Hyderabad District, Nampally Station Road, Abids, Hyderabad. 2 The Registrar, Osmania University, Osmania University Campus, Hyderabad. 3 Dr. Surya Prakash Jaiswal, S/o. Hari Prakash Jaiswal, Osmania University, R/o. H.No. 14-4-319, Begum Bazar, Hyderabad. 4 Dr. Avinash Jaiswal, S/o. Tejnarayana Jaiswal, Nizam College, Osmania University, R/o.H.No. 3-5- 926/13/1. Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad. ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.V.RAJEEVAN Counsel for respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for respondent No.2: Sri Deepak Bhattacharjee Counsel for respondent No.3: Sri Abhinand Kumar Shavali Counsel for respondent No.4: Sri B.Dananjaya The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled for issuing an appropriate writ to direct respondent No.2 to initiate appropriate action against respondents 3 and 4 in pursuance of proceedings dated 05-01-2002 and 24-01-2004 issued by respondent No.1 against respondents 4 and 3 respectively. On the complaints that respondents 3 and 4 obtained false caste certiﬁcates and secured employment on the basis of such certiﬁcates, respondent No.1 initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993, and on the basis of the recommendations made by the District Level Scrutiny Committee, he held that respondents 3 and 4 have obtained false community certiﬁcates. The petitioner ﬁled this writ petition seeking appropriate directions to initiate proceedings against respondents 3 and 4 to terminate their services. During the hearing, it has come out that respondent No.3 has not been in the service of the Osmania University. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though respondent No.3 was in the service of the Osmania University at the time of his ﬁling the writ petition, he appeared to have left the University later. Inasmuch as respondent No.3 is no longer in the service of the University, no direction can be given to the University to take action against him. As regards respondent No.4, today, at the hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Osmania University placed before me a sealed cover. On opening the sealed cover, this Court found two copies of order dated 21-08-2008 passed by the Registrar and Secretary to the Executive Council, wherein it is mentioned that the Executive Council at its 101st meeting held on 07-08-2008 considered the recommendations of the Enquiry Oﬃcer regarding the caste certiﬁcate submitted by respondent No.4 and that after a detailed discussion and examining the records, i.e., roster register, application form submitted by respondent No.4, advertisement No.6 of 1990 dated 09-11-1990 and the reservation system followed at that time, it was observed that the University while issuing appointment order of respondent No.4 committed an error in mentioning that the appointment was made against BC-B vacancy, but his actual appointment was against OC point in the roster. It is, however, mentioned that as submission of a false caste certiﬁcate itself is a misconduct though the same was not utilized for employment, the Executive Council resolved to recommend the punishment of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect against respondent No.4. As respondent No.2-University has now passed an order against respondent No.4, the cause in this writ petition, as conceived, does not survive for consideration. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed as infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to question the above mentioned order at his option. To enable him to do so, the learned counsel representing the University fairly agreed to serve one of the copies of the above mentioned order on the learned counsel for the petitioner. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, WPMP No.15237 of 2007 ﬁled by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 22nd August, 2008 vrn