IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE 4^ AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 31176 OF 2023 Between: Vempati Madhavi, W/o.Narendra Kumar sure, The Embassy Apartment, Lfne, Guntur Town and City, Guntur District, nd Plot No 5E, Ashok Nagar, 2 Andhra Pradesh 522007 ...PETITIONER AND High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Registrar, Administration, Nelapadu, Tulluru Mandal, Guntur District, Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issues a writ order ahd direction more particular in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in rejecting to consider me for the post of computer operator pertaining to the notification dated 23.02.2023 in which I was qualified in the written Examinatiori provisionally and also called for verification of original certificates in which the honorable authorities rejected me only for the reason of non sub mission of P.G.D.C.J certificate of Memo at the time of application and there is no willful default on part of me but unfortunately missed to upload this P.G.D.C.J certificate. I am poor women to lead our life and my husband is doing platform cloth business we are starving like anything and it is the last opportunity in my life to avail as per age. Respondent did not follow any procedure is illegal arbitrary violation of principles of Natural Justice Violative of Articles 14,21 and 300-A of the act and pass such other orders as this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. As per the Constitution of India under right to freedom at Article 19(1) (g). By adjudicating authority is taking away the basic rights or freedom I am eligible in all aspects except that I missed to enclose P.G.D.C.J certificate of Memo at the time of application. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent to consider my application for the post of computer operator pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner; SRI SESHAGIRI RAO ULLAM Counsel for the Respondent: SRI P; S. P. SURESH KUMAR The Court made the following: ORDER / .W(PMo.31176of2023 1/ rl 1 APHC010604462023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3483] WRIT PETITION NO: 31176/2023 Between: Vempati Madhavi ...PETITIONER AND High Court of AP Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SESHAGIRI RAO ULLAM Counsel for the Respondent: 1.PSPSURESH KUMAR CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 24.03.2025 ORDER (Per Sri Justice Ravi Cheemalapati) Challenge laid in this writ petition is to the action of the respondent in rejecting to consider her candidature for the post of Computer Operator, though qualified in the written examination, on the ground that she did not submit Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Applications (for short, 'PGDCA') certificate at the time of submission of application. ...RESPONDENT 0- :^fOei‘RCJ '.W(p.J^o.31176of2023 2. Heard Sri Ullam Seshagiri Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.S.P.Suresh Kumar, learned Standing counsel for High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 3. Sri Ullam Seshagiri Rao, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that due to some technical server issue, the petitioner could not upload PGDCA memo, which is neither willful nor was there any mala fide intention on the part of the petitioner. In fact the petitioner possessed Post Graduate Diploma Computer Applications much prior to the date of notification. Therefore, rejection for not uploading PGDCA memo at the time of submission of application is unconstitutiona l and the said rejection has to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, Sri PSP Suresh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for High Court, submitted that the notification in unambiguous terms clearly specifies that the particulars furnished by the applicant in the application form will be taken as final and since the petitioner failed to submit PGDCA the time of submission of application, her candidature was rightly rejected. The writ petition lacks merits and the same deserves dismissal. memo at / ^ .W(P.Jfo.31176of2023 3 5. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. In Charles K. Skaha v. C. Mathew (Drf, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with similar issue of non-submission of proof regarding possessing qualification of diploma along with the application, held that Proof of having obtained a diploma is different from the factum of having got it. Has the candidate, in fact, secured a diploma before the final date of application for admission to the degree course? That is the primary question. It is prudent to produce evidence of the diploma along with the application, but that is secondary. Relaxation of the date on the first is illegal, not so on the second. Academic excellence, through a diploma for which extra mark is granted, cannot be denuded because proof is produced only later, yet before the date of actual selection. The emphasis is on the diploma; the proof thereof subserves the factum of possession of the diploma and is not an independent factor...." 20. 7. In the instant case, having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner that she did PGDCA diploma course by the date of issuance of notification, non-submission of PGDCA diploma along with the application would not be a ground to reject her candidature. Hence, rejection of candidature of the petitioner on that ground is unsustainable and the same is set aside. If the respondent is satisfied that the petitioner possesses requisite PGDCA diploma as per the terms of the notification, she shall be considered \(1980) 2 see 752 .W(p.yio.31176of2023 4 for the post for which she was provisionally selected, provided she meets all other requirements. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO deputy registrar //TRUE COPY// N OFFICER SE' To, 1. The Registrar(Administration), High Court of Andhra Pradesh Nelapadu, Tulluru Mandal, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2 One CC to Sri Seshagiri Rao Ullam, Advocate [OPUC] 3 One CC to Sri P. S. P. Suresh Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies. ssb T ^ HIGH COURT '■ i DATED:24/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.31176 of 2023 g 0? APR 2025 ^ . Uurrwu aticuon . ^.y’ ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS