THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.32608 of 2010 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for the respondents. In this writ petition, petitioner questioned order, dated 13.10.2010, passed by the second respondent – Collector and District Magistrate, SPSR Nellore, in D.Dis(C5)231/2004. The petitioner was admitted into M.B.B.S. Course during 2002- 03 in the quota meant for Scheduled Tribe. She claims that she belongs to the community of Yerukala, which is a notified Scheduled Tribe. The second respondent initiated proceedings for verification of her caste status. Based on the findings recorded by the District Level Scrutiny Committee, Visakhapatnam, dated 23.09.2010, order, dated 13.10.2010, was passed by the second respondent cancelling caste certificate No.149/1996, dated 21.08.1996, issued by the fifth respondent – Tahsildar, Bogole Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, in favour of the petitioner. It is stated that as against the same, the petitioner availed remedy of appeal as provided under Section 7(2) of the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’). She also filed an application therein for grant of interim orders as provided under Section 7(4) of the Act. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though the petitioner filed application in the appeal filed by her before the first respondent, for grant of interim orders, the same has not been taken up. With regard to validity of the findings recorded by the second respondent in the impugned order, it is not desirable for this Court to go into the merits of the matter in view of pendency of the appeal filed by the petitioner before the first respondent. But, there appears no reason for not considering the application of the petitioner, by the first respondent. As it is stated that the petitioner completed M.B.B.S. Course, the respondents are trying to take steps based on the impugned order, she filed appeal before the first respondent as early as on 26.11.2010 and the appellate authority has not even taken up the matter for passing appropriate interim orders, I deem it appropriate to direct the first respondent/appellate authority to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner on 26.11.2010 against the impugned order, as expeditiously as possible. Further, as the impugned order passed by the second respondent is subject matter of the appeal, there shall be suspension of the impugned order till appropriate orders are passed by the appellate authority in the appeal filed by the petitioner and such orders are communicated to her. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 24th DECEMBER, 2010. kvni