Bonam Venkatachalamayya Educational Society, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

BVC COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING,, DOOR NO 2-258/1 AND 114-2-480, PALACHERLA, RAJANAGARAM MANDAL -533353, EAST GODAWARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH REP. BY ITS SECRETARY AND CORRESPONDENT, BONAMKANAKAYYA

¶11

BONAM KANAKAYYA,, S/O. (LATE) VENKATA CHALAMAYYA, DOOR NO 4-198, EDARAPALLI, AMALAPURAM- 533201,

¶12

...PETITIONER(S)

¶13

AND

¶14

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMRAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶15

THE CONVENER, POLYCET-2025 ADMISSIONS OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, DOOR NO 11307, GARUDADRI K.K. TOWERS, FLAT NO. 501, 6TH FLOOR, LAKSHMI NARASIMHA COLONY, NEAR DR. Y.S.R. AAROGYASRI HEATH CARE TRUST, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522 503

¶16

STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING, REP.BY. SECRETARY,DOOR NO 11-307, GARUDADRI K.K. TOWERS, FLAT NO. 501, 5TH FLOOR, LAKSHMI NARASIMHA COLONY, NEAR DR. Y.S.R. AAROGYASRI HEATH CARE TRUST, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522 503

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

SRK, J W.P.No.35692 of 2025

¶19

2

¶20

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 tomay be pleased to ISSUE an order or orders or Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the 2nd respondent in refusing to ratify the students who were admitted in to the 2nd petitioner institution under SPOT ADMISSION QUOTA i.e., 13 students in Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering (ECE) and 2 in students Diploma in Computer Engineering (CME) in total 15 students belongs to other states were admitted who belongs to other states for the academic year 2025-2026 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of Presidential Order 1974, and further direct the respondents to consider all the following list of students Aakash Kumar, S/o Jaydeep Thakur - D.ECE 2. DibyaKumari, D/o Virendra Mishra - D.ECE 3. Jitendra Kumar, S/o Ramlakhan Sharma - D.ECE 4.Sonu Kumar, S/o Bablu Saw D.ECE 5. Ankita Kumari, D/o Manoj Kumar Sharma - D.ECE 6. Saurav Kumar, S/o Dayaram Yadav - D.ECE 7. D.ECE 5. Bishal Kumar,S/o Ramchaner Mallick - D.ECE 8. Dharmendra Paswan - D.ECE 9. Rashmi Priya, D/o Shambhavi Kumari, D/o Maruti Singh - D.ECE lO.Annu Kumari, D/o Pankaj Mishra - D.ECE 11. Sadrun Khatun, D/o Md. Shamsher - D.ECE 12. Kajal Kumari, D/o Pramod Jha - D.ECE 13. Dharmveer Kumar, S/o Navin Singh - D.CME 14. Sonali Kumari, D/o Ajit Sah - D.CME IS.Sejal Kumari, D/o Sudheer Sharma DECE Admissions made by the 2nd petitioner in left over seats as valid and approve the admissions made by the petitioners and further direct the respondents to ratify the list of 15 students belongs to other states admitted by the 2nd petitioner and to treat the same as valid for all purposes including appearing in the examinations or to pass such

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶22

1.CHALLA AJAY KUMAR

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶24

1.GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

¶25

SRK, J W.P.No.35692 of 2025

¶26

3

¶27

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶28

The present Writ Petition has been filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-

¶29

“…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 2^nd respondent in refusing to ratify the students who were admitted into the 2^nd petitioner institution under spot admission quota i.e. 13 students in Diploma in Electronics and Communication Engineering (ECE) and 2 in students Diploma in Computer Engineering (CME) in total 15 students belong to other states who were admitted for the Academic Year 2025-2026, as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and further direct the respondents to ratify and approve the admissions of out of State students (15 in number) admitted in the 2^nd petitioner institution under the left over vacant seats (spot admissions) category and treat the said admissions as valid for all purposes.”

¶30

Heard Sri Challa Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Education for the respondents and with their consent, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

¶31

SRK, J W.P.No.35692 of 2025

¶32

4

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the present matter is squarely covered by the common order passed by this court on 20.11.2009 in W.P.No.24581 of 2009 and batch; therefore, he prayed to dispose of this Writ Petition in terms of the aforesaid order.

¶34

Learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, reported no objection for disposing of the present Writ Petition in terms of the aforesaid order.

¶35

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed in terms of the common order, dated 21.11.2009, passed in W.P.No.24581 of 2009 and batch. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶36