IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 12988 of 2009 Between: B.Sujatha D/o.Venkataswamy R/o.D.No.46/715,Budhavarapupeta Kurnool, Kurnool District ..... PETITIONER AND The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad rep.by its Registrar General, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT 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 fully one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in rejecting the application of the petitioner illegal, arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to appear for the screening test which will be conducted on 5.7.2009 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.ALLAGADDA CHANDRA SEKHARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: G.VIDYASAGAR (SC FOR APHC) The Court made the following : ORDER: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED & THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WP No.12988 OF 2009 ORDER: ( per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed ) This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings Roc.No.1/2009-RC, dated 29-6- 2009 passed by the Registrar General, High Court of AP, Hyderabad- respondent herein as being illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to appear for the screening test to be held on 5-7-2009. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondent. Perused the impugned order passed by the respondent. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that pursuant to the notification issued by the High Court for recruitment to the posts of junior civil judges, the petitioner being qualified in all respects, applied for the said post by enclosing a demand draft for Rs.100/- taken from the SBH, Kurnool and other enclosures within time. However, by the impugned order, the application of the petitioner was rejected by the respondent on the ground that the demand draft enclosed to the application was issued i n favour of “JCJ Registrar General, High Court of AP” instead of “Registrar General, High Court of AP”. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is a mistake committed by the bank officials and they have wrongly noted the name in whose favour the demand draft is to be drawn. Learned counsel also submitted that a fresh demand draft in the name of “Registrar General, High Court of AP” will be furnished by the petitioner by tomorrow. 5. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to permit the petitioner to appear for the screening test by treating the application submitted by her as proper and issue hall ticket forthwith, on petitioner furnishing fresh demand draft by tomorrow. No order as to costs. ____________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J ____________________ Vilas V. Afzulpurkar, J Dated: 1-7-2009 Note: cc today. B/o Nrg