Judgment :- S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. The writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for a direction on respondents 1 and 2 herein to appoint the petitioner for the post of combined Subordinate Services Examination – I, 2007 (Group II Services) from the date on which the other selected candidates have been appointed within a time frame as fixed by this Honble Court. 2. It appears that the petitioner Mr. M. Ganesan applied with Registration No: 11104075 for direct recruitment to the post of Village Administrative Officer in 2006. In his application he claimed that he belong to Schedule Tribe – Kattu Nayakan Community. However, as the matter was pending before the District Vigilance Committee for enquiry and report, he had not enclosed the copy of the community certificate along with the application. 3. It has been accepted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission that the petitioner by letter dated 7th February 2007 intimated that the matter is pending enquiry before the District Vigilance Committee which was to enquire into the matter in view of the Court’s order with regard to the community of the petitioner. He intimated that he had already attended the enquiry regarding the verification of the community certificate on 22nd September 2006 made by the District Vigilance Committee but the enquiry report was pending before the said Committee, Dindigul. As per the direction of the High Court Madras the Committee was to take decision on an early date. But because of the delay on the part of the District Vigilance Committee, Dindigul, in making enquiry he could not enclose the copy of the community certificate along with application though he claim that he belong to Schedule Tribe – Kattu Nayakan Community. It has not been disputed by Public Service Commission that, for verification on 25th October 2008, the petitioner had produced the original community certificate dated 8th August, 2007 issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani. The Public Service Commission, for verification of the genuineness of the community certificate, referred the matter to the State Level Scrutiny Committee by letter dated 26th December 2007, which in turn, after inquiry, confirmed in their report dated 26th August, 2008 that the petitioner belongs to Hindu Kattu Nayakan community included under Schedule Tribe and the community certificate obtained by the individual from the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, on 8th August 2007 is genuine. 4. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission referred to the instruction given to the candidates and submitted that as per the instruction the petitioner should have forwarded the copy of the community certificate to the Public Service Commission. Having not forwarded such certificate, his case has not been considered against the post reserved for Schedule Tribe candidates. However, it is accepted that there was no latches on the part of the petitioner as the matter was pending with the District Vigilance Committee, Dindigul, and inspite of order passed by this High Court at the instance of the petitioner, the certificate was not provided by the time the petitioner applied but petitioner produced the same at the time of scrutiny of the document. 5. In the facts and circumstances, we find that there was no latches on the part of the petitioner. When the petitioner appeared for the competitive examination and has come out successfully and when the community certificate has been produced by the petitioner at the time of scrutiny of the documents, this Court is of the view that the respondents should consider the case of the petitioner against the post of Village Administrative Officer, if vacant and earmarked for Schedule Tribe candidates. If any person below the position of the petitioner has been appointed, the respondents cannot deny appointment to the petitioner except on the ground on non availability of posts. The respondents are directed to take a decision in this regard and make appropriate recommendations, if so required to the concerned department, within a period of one month from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. However, there shall be no orders as to the costs.