High Court for State of TelanganaWP/1971/2011disposed of no costs

N. Swathi v. The Project Officer, (Itda),

2016-07-19P Naveen Rao4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND SIXTEEN

Present

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.1971 of 2011 Between:

N. Swathi, D/o.Vykunta Rao, aged about 23 years, Occ:Unemployee R/o.Ragidi, G.L.Puram Mandal, Vizianagaram District.

.. Petitioner AND The Project Officer (ITDA), Parvathipuram, Vizianagaram District and others.

.. Respondents

The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.1971 of 2011

ORDER

Petitioner was selected as Secondary Grade Teacher in pursuance of the notification issued on 07.10.2010. The recruitment is in scheduled area. Petitioner claims to be a person belonging to 'Kondadora' community, which is a scheduled tribe. According to the petitioner, she has obtained scheduled tribe certificate on 15.06.2004 and the same was produced to the respondents at the time of verification of certificates. However, without issuing appointment orders, petitioner was asked to produce once again the caste certificate issued recently by the competent authority vide notice dated 03.01.2011. According to petitioner, when she approached the Tahsildar for issuance of a new caste certificate, the Tahsildar refused to issue the same on the ground that the caste certificate was already issued.

In the circumstances, petitioner instituted this writ petition contending that it is not open to the respondents to insist for production of caste certificate afresh when the same was already submitted. According to the petitioner, the status of the petitioner as 'Kondadora' is not in doubt and she holds a valid certificate issued by the competent authority.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

Government Pleader for Social Welfare for respondents. 3 This Court, by order dated 02.02.2011, granted interim direction directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Secondary Grade Teacher in terms of the notification already issued. No counter affidavit is filed.

Apparently, the only grievance of the petitioner is that even though the caste certificate was already submitted, the respondents again insisting to submit a fresh caste certificate and when she approached the Tahsildar, caste certificate is not issued and therefore, she should suffer on account of non issuance of caste certificate and insistence of a new caste certificate even though already the same was submitted. Considering the same, this Court granted interim direction. If the petitioner is already appointed, no cause in the writ petition survives. If there is no other impediment and by now the order of this Court is not complied, the respondents are directed to take steps to appoint the petitioner without insisting for submission of a fresh caste certificate, if the petitioner has already submitted the caste certificate.

However, if the respondent authorities doubted the genuineness of the caste certificate, it is always open to them to take appropriate course of action as warranted by law and disposal of the writ petition does not come in the way of taking such course of action. 5 The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. ________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J 19th July, 2016