The court established that rejection of EWS certification without proper appreciation of ownership and regulations is unjustified, warranting corrective action.

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the 1^st respondent dated 25.10.2024 bearing Ref. No.755/STOY/EWS- Certificate/2024 read with the proceedings of the 4^th respondent dated 28.10.2024 in No.39339/DSLR/Estt./EC-II/2022-23, quash the same and consequently direct the 1^st respondent to issue EWS certificate to the petitioner and protect the petitioner’s selection to the post of Field Assistant Level–2 in the Directorate of Survey and Land Records, Puducherry.

2. The case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the employment notification dated 12.12.2022 issued by the 4^th respondent for recruitment to the post of Field Assistant in the Directorate of Survey and Land Records, Puducherry, he applied under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category. He had participated in the written examination held on 08.10.2023 and was placed in the provisional selection list published on 10.10.2023.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner had approached the 1^st respondent and submitted his application for issuance of EWS certificate. However, the petitioner’s application was rejected by the 1^st respondent vide order dated 29.11.2023 on the ground that the petitioner’s family possessed a residential property exceeding the permissible extent. Subsequent to rejection order dated

29.11.2023, he preferred an appeal before the 2^nd respondent and the said appeal was also rejected by the 2^nd respondent by order dated 01.12.2023. 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing writ petition viz., W.P. No.5932 of 2024. This Court, by order dated 23.09.2024 in W.P. No.5932 of 2024, set aside the earlier orders and remanded the matter to the 1^st respondent to reconsider the petitioner’s claim for issuance of EWS certification in the light of the subsequent rectification deed executed by the petitioner’s father and the report of the Deputy Tahsildar dated 15.04.2024, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order.

5. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted a representation dated

03.10.2024. However, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the 1^st respondent again rejected his request for EWS certificate by proceedings dated 25.10.2024. Consequently, the 4^th respondent cancelled the petitioner’s provisional selection to the post of Field Assistant order vide dated 28.10.2024. Challenging the order dated 25.10.2024 issued by the 1^st respondent as well as the proceedings of the

4^th respondent dated 28.10.2024, this writ petition has been filed.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner commenced his arguments by pointing out the contents of the impugned order dated 25.10.2024 and submitted that as per the land records, the property comprised in T.S.No.C/3/85 measuring 0.01.76 Hectares originally stood in the joint names of the petitioner’s grandfather Kanakala Subba Rao and his brother Kanakala Veeranna @ Veeraraju. As per Partition Deed No.229/1986, the said extent was divided between them wherein an extent of 88.81 sq.mts fell to the share of the petitioner’s grandfather and 87.92 sq.mts to the share of his brother. The extent of 88.81 sq.mts was subsequently settled in favour of petitioner’s father by way of Settlement Deed No.98/2006. He specifically submitted that thereafter the said property was settled by the petitioner’s father in favour of the petitioner’s sister through Settlement Deed No.29124 of 2022 dated 05.09.2022 and the petitioner was not allotted any property. He strenously argued that the petitioner did not own any property either in his name or in his father’s name, on the date of submitting his application for the said post. He also submitted that a rectification deed dated 31.05.2024 was executed clarifying the actual extent of the site as 83.40 sq.mts.

7. Further, it is the argument