THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22356 of 2009 ORDER: The respondents herein i.e M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, issued a notification, dated 27.07.2009, inviting applications for selection of Kisan Seva Kendra (Retail Outlet) Dealership at Gudeppad, Warangal District. The dealership was reserved in favour of the category of paramilitary personnel. One of the particulars to be provided by the candidate is his residence in the area concerned. The petitioner submitted an application enclosing all the relevant certificates. As regards the proof of his residence, he relied upon a comprehensive certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, who certified caste, date of birth and nativity. The respondents addressed a letter, dated 10.09.2009, to the petitioner stating that the application submitted by him was rejected, on the ground that he did not enclose the residence certificate. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The requirement under the notification issued by the respondents is very specific and categorical. The requirement is to file residence certificate. Admittedly, the petitioner did not file any certificate in relation to his residence. What was filed by him is a comprehensive certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, who certified the date of birth, nativity and caste of the petitioner. It hardly needs any mention that nativity is totally different and distinct from residence. The nativity of a person is almost constant, whereas the residence may vary and can be changed depending on the avocation or necessity. When the respondents are clear in their mind to the effect that the applicant must be a resident of the area concerned, the fact that the petitioner happens to be a native of that place, does not satisfy the requirement. Even while, being a native of particular place, an individual can be resident of a different place. Therefore, no exception can be taken to the impugned order. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only application received by the respondents was that of the petitioner and in the event of the dealership being notified, the petitioner may be permitted to submit his application. The petitioner hardly needs any permission for this purpose. He can submit the application as of right and in case he fulfils the requirements, it is needless to mention that it shall be considered on its own merits. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:26.10.2009 kdl