Disposed

Madrasa-I-Aizza v. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University

Telangana HC30 Aug 2018WP/10553/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Common order disposing of numerous writ petitions challenging admission decisions. The High Court accepted submissions from JNTU's Standing Counsel that admitted students would be allowed to continue and disposed of the petitions without further order.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions disposed of; admitted students allowed to continue their courses without disturbance.

Madrasa-I-Aizza Vs Jawaharlal Nehru Technological… — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION Nos.23703, 23704, 23712, 23716, 23720, 23723,23795, 23796, 23797, 23798, 23799, 23800, 23801, 23803, 23804, 23805, 23806, 23811, 23944, 23920, 23923, 23924, 23926, 23930, 23931, 23934, 23936, 23937, 23941, 23942, 23943, 23945, 23946, 23947, 23948, 23949, 23950, 23952, 23953, 23956, 23960, 23966, 23967, 23968, 23969, 23970, 23971, 23972, 23975, 23978, 23980, 23984, 23986, 23988, 23990, 23991, 23992, 23993, 23994, 23996, 23997, 24000, 24002, 24003, 24006, 24007, 24008, 24009, 24016, 24020, 24022, 24032, 24033, 24034, 24037, 24040, 24041, 24043, 24046, 24047, 24049, 24050, 24051, 24054, 24055, 24056, 24057, 24059, 24060, 24061, 24062, 24063, 24064, 24065, 24072, 24079, 24083, 24086, 24087, 24089, 24098, 24101, 24113, 24117, 24119, 24122, 24129, 24135, 24139, 24140, 24212, 24236, 24240, 24307, 24198, 23708, 23714, 23715, 23717, 23718, 23728, 23730, 23738, 23743, 23768, 23777, 23782, 23808, 23816, 23855, 23866, 23870, 23900, 23905, 23907, 23911, 23912, 23915,23918, 23922, 23935, 24196, 24197 of 2014 1875, 1898, 2144, 2999, 3010, 3151, 3673, 4936, 4991, 5154, 5256, 5277, 5295, 5367, 6843, 6846, 6870, 6897, 6904, 6909, 6911, 6946, 6957, 6976, 7006, 7009, 7401, 8308, 8367, 8386, 8402, 8779, 9065, 10538, 10553, 12460, 12551, 12552, 13525, 15768 of 2015

¶3

COMMON ORDER :

¶4

As the issue involved in all these Writ Petitions is one and the same, they are being heard together and disposed of by way of this Common Order.

¶5

Heard Sri S.Niranjan Reddy, learned Senior Counsel and Sri S.Sri Ram, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri V.Ramachander Goud, learned Standing Counsel for Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU).

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the students studying in the petitioners’ colleges have completed their course, they cannot be disturbed.

¶7

Sri V.Ramchander Goud, learned Standing Counsel for JNTU, on instructions submits that the students who have been admitted by the colleges in these writ petitions will not be disturbed and that they will be allowed to continue to study their courses.

¶8

Sri S.Sri Ram, learned counsel appearing for some of the petitioners, seeks to dispose of the Writ Petitions, recording the submission of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for JNTU.

¶9

In view of above, recording the aforesaid submission of the learned Standing Counsel, all these writ petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these writ petitions, shall stand closed.

¶10

_______________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J

¶11

30.08.2018 tk.

Madrasa-I-Aizza v. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madrasa-I-Aizza v. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University

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

Mrk Polytehnic Vs The All India Council for Technical Education

Dr. DanthuriSharath Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Olympic Association of Telangana Vs Indian Olympic Association

N. Arun Kumar, Vs State of Telangana

B.Bhargav S/o.Sudhakar, Vs Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University

Sri Saraswathi Educational Society, Vs The State of Telangana