Petitioner, an Assistant Engineer, sought direction to AICTE to consider his representations requesting addition of 1.43% marks in its December 2018 validating examination for his distance-mode B.Tech degree. Court declined to go into merits and directed respondents to decide the representations within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
APHC010131642024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3333] (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY , T HE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO T H OUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 6671/2024
Between:
Dommaraju Bhaskar R aju
...PETITIONER
AND
All India Council For T e chnical Education and ...RESPONDENT(S)
Others
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.SOMISETTY GA N ESH BABU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.M UMA DEVI (C E NTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)
The Court made the following:
2
3
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:
“ to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents more particularly Respondent No.1 in considering the representations of the petitioner dated 04.05.2019, 26.07.2019 and 02.11.2019 for adding 1.43% marks for qualifying and validating examination conducted by AICTE for validating his B.Tech Electrical and Electronics Engineering Degree from Vinayaka Mission University through Distance Mode as arbitrary, illegal and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondent No.1 in considering the representations made by the Petitioner dated 04.05.2019, 26.07.2019 and 02.11.2019 for adding 1.43% of marks for qualifying and validating examination conducted by the AICTE during December 2018 so as to validate the Degree obtained by the petitioner in B.Tech Electrical and Electronics Engineering from Vinayaka Mission University, through Distance Education Mode ..”
4
Council for Technical Education [AICTE] during December, 2018 and obtained 162 marks out of 420 marks i.e., 38.57% marks as against required percentage of 40% marks. Thus, the shortfall is only 1.43% to come up successful in the said examination. Therefore, the petitioner submitted representations to the respondents on 04.05.2019, 26.07.2019 and 02.11.2019 requesting to add 1.43% marks for qualifying and validating examination for any further elevation in the department. However, the respondents did not respond for the same. Hence, the present Writ Petition.
5
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
__________________________ SMT JUSTICE V. SUJATHA
Dated 19.03.2024 Pnr
6
74
THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V. SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No. 6671 of 2024
Date: 19.03.2024
Pnr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent authorities must consider the petitioner's representations seeking addition of 1.43% marks in the AICTE qualifying examination to validate his distance-mode B.Tech degree.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dommaraju Bhaskar Raju
All India Council For Technical Education
V. Sujatha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
