Disposed

Mohammed Khwaja Illias Mohi v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC7 Jan 2024WP/457/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged non-joining of a 3-year LL.B. course despite a provisional allotment claim, citing arbitrary denial. Court noted the college had not refused admission but sought affiliation verification. Petitioner was directed to furnish this information within one week, and the writ petition was disposed of without costs.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach the college and furnish information sought by them regarding the affiliation of his graduation college within one week.

Mohammed Khwaja Illias Mohi Vs State of… — Education and Admissions | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

\ ^

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY. THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 457 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mohammed Khwaja lllias Mohi, Mohammed Hamiddun Ahammad, aged about 33 years, 26-40-54/A, A T Agraharam, 4th lane. Near Ganesh Bakery, Boring Pump Center, Guntur, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education department Secretariat Buildings, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶12

The Convener. A.P.LAW/PGLCET - Admissions, 2023, Acharya Naqarjuna

¶13

University, Guntur, Guntur District.

¶14

The Andhra Pradesh State Council for Higher Education, Rep. By. Its Secretary, Neeladri Towers, 6th Battalion Road, Mangalagiri,^{GunturDistrict.}

¶15

Bar Counsel of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Chairmen, A.P. High Court Building, Nelapadu, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh.

¶16

The Principal, J.C.College of Law, Guntur, Guntur District.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

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 issue order, direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare action of the respondents particularly the respondent No.5 in not permitting to report/join for 3 years LL.B., course in pursuance of the provisional allotment order issued by the 3^" respondent without issuing any notice as arbitrary, illegal and violation of provisions of right to education and apart from violation of Article 21-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 5th respondent to allow/join the petitioner into 3 years LL.B. course.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to dlrecf tfio 5^^ respondent to allow to report/join^{thepetitionerinto3yearsLL.B.,} course in pursuance of the provisional allotment order issued by the 5th respondent pending disposal of the main writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DAGGUBATI RAMASWAMY^REDDY

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2,4 & 5:—

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: M/s. S.PARINEETHA,^SCFORAPSCHE

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶26

¶27

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.457 of 2024

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking

¶31

the following relief

¶32

“...to issue Writ, order or orders specially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare action of the respondents particularly the respondent No. 5 in not permitting to report/join .for 3 years LL.B/, course in pursuance of the provisional allotment order issued by the 3^ respondent without issuing any notice as arbitrary, illegal and violation of provisions of right to education and apart from violation of Article 21-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the S''* respondent to allow/join the petitioner into 3 years LL.B. course and pass....”

¶33

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Higher Education and perused the material on record.

¶34

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner after completion of his Graduation in Bachelor of Commerce (B.Com.,) at Gandhi Institute of Technology and Management (GITAM) Deemed University, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh on 28.U7.2022, appeared for 3 years LAWCET-2023 examination conducted by the respondent No.2-University bearing

¶35

riT.

¶36

¶37

Hall ticket No.3358010132 and obtained 1449 rank in the said entrance test. Thereafter, the respondent^No.3 allotted seat for the petitioner in the respondent^No.5- Colloge and directed the petitioner to report before^the respondent-college form 03.01.2024 to 05.01.2024. When the petitioner approached the respondent-college on 03.01.2024 for joining the course, the respondent No.5 without assigning any reason refused to allow^the petitioner to join the course. It is further stated that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 after duly verifying the original certificates submitted by the petitioner, allotted^seatin the respondent No.5-college. Aggrieved by the action^of the respondent No.5, the present writ petition is filed 4. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing Mrs.S.Parineetha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 on oral instructions has informed this Court that, the respondent No.5 has never refused to join the petitioner in the 3 years LL.B. Course. But, however have sought information whether the GITAM College, in which the petitioner has done Graduation, was having proper affiliation or not as on the date of

¶38

¶39

completion of petitioner’s course. But, instead of giving the said information, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition and further informed this Court that as and when the petitioner approaches the respondent No.5-college and furnish the information sought by them, the respondent No.5-college is ready to join^the

¶40

petitioner for 3 years LL.B. course.

¶41

In view of the above submission, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to approach the respondent No.5-College and furnish the information as sought by them within^a period of one (01) week from today i.e., 08.01.2024.

¶42

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶43

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this

¶44

Writ Petition shall stand closed.

Sd/- P. VINOD KUMAR

To,

//TRUE COPY//

SECTfON OFFICER

The Principal Secretary, Higher Education department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶51

The Convener, A.P.l_AW/PGLCET - Admissions, 2023, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Guntur, Guntur District.

¶52

The Secretary, Andhra Pradesh State Council for Higher Education, Neeladri Towers, 6th Battalion Road, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.

¶53

The Chairmen, Bar Counsel of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. High Court Building, Nelapadu, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh.

¶54

The Principal, J.C.College of Law, Guntur, Guntur District.fSPECIAL MESSANGER]

¶55

One CC to Sri Daggubati Ramaswamy Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

¶56

One CC to M/s. S. Parineetha, SC for APSCHE[OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Higher Education, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Three CD Copies.

ssb gl Vlte:

/•

HIGH COURT

OATED:08/01/2024

ORDER

WP.No.457 of 2024

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

Mohammed Khwaja Illias Mohi v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Khwaja Illias Mohi v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Koviri Mark Vs the State of Ap

Sarada B.PEd College Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Annamacharya Institute of Tech and Sciences,and 6 Vs State of Ap,Prl.Scy,T.E,Hyd,and 4

B.Bose Pranadeep Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M/S Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. Vs the State of Ap

Secy, Srinivasa Educational Society, Prakasam Dist and Anr. Vs Spl Chief Secy, Higher EDUCATION(TE/A2) Dept, Hyderabad and 3