*HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY +WRIT PETITION NO.15593 OF 2008 % 22nd July 2008 # M. Bhawana. …Petitioner And $ Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited (Government of Andhra Pradesh undertaking), rep. By its Chairman & Managing Director, Hyderabad & another. …Respondents ! Counsel for the petitioner : Mr.Siva. ^ Counsel for respondent : MR.K.V.SIMHADRI < Gist: > Head Note: ? Cases referred: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 15593 OF 2008 O R D E R: The respondents issued Employment Notiﬁcation, dated 14.2.2008, inviting applications for various posts, including the post of Assistant Manager (Accounts). Reservations were made applicable to the posts, which were proposed to be ﬁlled up. The petitioner submitted her application, for the post of Assistant Manager (Accounts), against a vacancy reserved in favour of B.C-B category. She appeared in the written test held on 4.5.2008, and thereafter, in the interview conducted on 12.6.2008. Her name was included in the list of selected candidates. However, she was not issued orders of appointment, though the other selected candidates were appointed, on being selected. The petitioner challenges the action of the respondents. The petitioner contends that she has ﬁled a Community Nativity, and Date of Birth Certiﬁcate, dated 10.3.2008, issued by the Tahsildar, Nampally Mandal, Hyderabad District, and there was no basis for the respondents, to doubt her social status. She contends that the A.P (Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe & Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certiﬁcates Act, 1993, and the Rules 1997, made thereunder, confer ﬁnality to the certiﬁcates issued thereunder, till the otherwise is ,proved and the action of the respondents, in not appointing her, is arbitrary and illegal. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents took notice, at the stage of admission, and advanced arguments, on the basis of instructions received by him. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The petitioner holds the requisite qualifications for applying to the post of Assistant Manager (Accounts). She was also successful in the written test and interview, conducted by the Selection Committee, and in fact, was included in the list of selected candidates. The respondents state that the non-issuance of order of appointment to the petitioner, is on account of the dispute, with regard to her social status. According to them, the social status of the petitioner was certiﬁed on 4.8.1987 by the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, Golconda, as “Yadava”, which falls in B.C-D (33), whereas, in the latest certiﬁcate dated 10.3.2008, her caste was shown as “Kuruma” and placed in B.C-B category. It is stated that in view of the discrepancy, the petitioner is required to obtain a fresh certificate. It is true that the provisions of the Act and the Rules, attach ﬁnality and acceptability to the certiﬁcate issued by the authority prescribed thereunder. Where, however, conﬂicting versions in respect of the same candidate emerge, it is but natural that the candidate is required to seek clariﬁcation, or to obtain afresh certificate. At any rate, the matter has to be certiﬁed by superior authorities, when such conﬂicting versions exist. Therefore, no exception can be taken to the action of the respondents, in not issuing the orders of appointment. Further, it is not a case of rejection of the case of the petitioner, outright. She is only required to clarify the doubt that exists, about her social status. This court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner, at this stage. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. It is, however, made clear that as and when the petitioner places necessary material, clarifying the doubt about her social status, the respondents shall consider the feasibility of issuing orders of appointment. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 22nd July 2008 Note: L.R. copy to be marked. (b/o) PAN