Usha Rama Educational Academy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Usha Rama Educational Academy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondents directed to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's proposal seeking extension of approval within one (1) week of receipt of the order; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stood closed; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent Nos.1 to 5 were obliged to implement the AICTE statutory approvals dated 03.06.2026 (extension of approval, increased sanctioned intake and additional courses, including Diploma in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for 2026-27) by reflecting them on the APPOLYCET-2026 admissions portal. +2 more

Court's answer

The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's proposal seeking extension of approval within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of the order.

Ratio / Principle

Because the issue related to admission of students to colleges while counselling was underway, the Court deemed disposal of the writ petition with directions appropriate.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Hon'ble Smt Justice Kiranmayee Mandava, single Bench), Writ Petition No.17900 of 2026, decided 07.07.2026: Disposed of. Usha Rama Educational Academy (Usha Rama College of Engineering and Technology) complained of the inaction of respondents 1 to 5 in failing to implement the AICTE approvals (proceedings dated 03.06.2026) for extension of approval — including the newly approved Diploma in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for academic year 2026-27 — which continued to go unreflected on the APPOLYCET-2026 admissions portal, leaving the petitioner unable to admit students despite counselling commencing 24.06.2026. The State side informed that the proposal remained under examination by the Government against applicable policy guidelines. Finding the matter time-sensitive amid ongoing counselling, the Court did not adjudicate the merits further but directed the respondents to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's extension-of-approval proposal within one week of receipt of the order; miscellaneous petitions were closed and no costs were imposed.

1

Date of reserved for orders : ------------Date of pronouncement : 07.07.2026 Date of uploading :

APHC010338972026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3458]

TUESDAY, THE 7^th DAY OF JULY 2026

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

WRIT PETITION NO: 17900 OF 2026

Between:

USHA RAMA EDUCATIONAL ACADEMY, (USHA RAMA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY) NH-5, TELAPROLU, UNGUTURU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, GOTTIPATI VENKATA KRISHNA SRIDHARA VARA PRASAD, S/O. VEERA RAGHAVAIAH, AGED 60 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO.304, BLOCK 5, ROYAL GREEN CITY, AUTO NAGAR ROAD, KANURU, PENAMALURU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, THULLUR MANDAL, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. - 522238

THE COMMISSIONER OF HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GARUDADRI K.K. TOWERS, LAKSHMI NARASIMHA COLONY, SERVICE ROAD, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -522503.

THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, D.NO. 11-307, GARUDADRI K.K. TOWERS, LAKSHMI NARASIMHA COLONY, SERVICE ROAD, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -522503

2

STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING, (APSBTET) REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY GARUDADRI KK TOWERS, SERVICE ROAD, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR - 522503.

THE CONVENOR AND CHE, APPOLYCET -2026 ADMISSIONS, D.NO.11-307, GARUDADRI KK TOWERS, FLAT.NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, LAKSHMI NARASIMHA COLONY, BYPASS ROAD, NEAR DR YSR AAROGYASRI HEALTHCARE TRUST, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522 503.

ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION AICTE, NELSON MADELA MARG, VASANTH KUNJ, NEW DELHI-110070. REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

The Court made the following order:

Heard Sri Rambabu Koppineedi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education appearing for respondents.

The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is against the action of the respondent Nos.1 to 5 in failing to implement the statutory approvals granted by the 6^th respondent - All India Council For Technical Education (AICTE) proceedings dated 03.06.2026 for extension of approval and in continuing to display the old intake capacity in the APPOLYCET admissions portal of “APPOLYCET” without reflecting the increase in the sanctioned intake and additional courses approved by AICTE.

3

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the AICTE has granted

approval for the admission of students in Diploma course in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for the academic year 2026-27. However, the same has not been reflected in the student admission portal. On account of the same, despite the said course being approved for the academic year 2026-27, the petitioner is unable to admit the students for the Diploma course in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning.

When the matter has been taken up for consideration, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education has placed before the Court a copy of instructions received by him in the case. A perusal of the same would reflect that the granting of permission by the respondents is a separate administrative process which requires examination of the proposal and consideration of all relevant aspects by the Government before taking a final decision. It further reflects that the proposal of the petitioner for commencement of the said course i.e., “Diploma in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning” is under consideration of the Government and the necessary orders would be passed after the proposal is examined by the Government and the applicable policy guidelines.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent

Nos.1 to 5 would submit that since the application is pending without the approval by the State Departments, the petitioner cannot take admission for the said course, unless the approval is granted by the State Authority.

4

It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner approached the respondent authorities in the month of March, 2026. The counseling was commenced on 24.06.2026, on account of the inaction on the part of the respondents, the petitioner is unable to admit the students to the said course, despite the same being approved by the AICTE.

Having regard to contentions, since the issue relates to the admission of students to colleges for which the counseling is underway, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders on the proposal of the petitioner seeking extension of approval within a period of one (1) week from the date of the receipt of the order.

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

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

_______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

Date: 07.07.2026 BSK

Whether the order is:

Speaking	`☑`	Reasoned
Reportable		Non-reportable	`☑`

5

19

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

WRIT PETITION NO: 17900 OF 2026

Date: 07.07.2026 BSK