Disposed

Pamulati Shreya v. The Registrar (Admin) Ignou

Telangana HC2 Feb 2021WP/4558/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a student against IGNOU regarding non-declaration of results due to overlapping subject choices. The direction is to permit the petitioner to opt for an alternative subject and sit for exams within the same semester.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was permitted to opt for any other optional course, appear for the final year examination with the newly opted subject, and the degree award would be considered based on performance in

Pamulati Shreya Vs The Registrar (Admin) Ignou — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO:4558 OF 2019

¶6

Between:

¶7

Pamulati thl"yq, D/o.P. Syam Sunder reddy Aged. 28 years, Occ. Student Lpursuing^{B.A)-EnrolmentNo- 150008227,N6.FEf No.6565, panchavatiApts.} Pragati Nagar,Qutubullapur, l\4edchal [r,4alkajgiri District.

¶8

AND

¶9

...pEIIoNER

¶10

The Registrar (ADIVlN) IGNOU, Rep. by its Registra(ADlVtN) tVaidan Garhi,New Delhi -110008.

¶11

The Vice-Chancellor, IGNOU, l,4aidan Garhi, New Delhi-'1^'10008.

¶12

The Regional Director, IGNOU, Regional Centre, Kavuri Hills, lr/adhapur, Hyderabad District.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of l,4andamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not declaring the results of AFW-E (Feature Writing in English) illegal, arbitrary, u nconstitutio na I and violative of Art. 14 and 21 and of the Constitution of lndia, consequently direct the^'lst respondent to issue Original Graduation Certificate of B.A. in Sociology to the petitioner expeditiously and also direct them to pay the Compensation for loss causing to the petitioner and for her mental agony

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to declare the results of the petitioner's AFW-E ( Feature Writing in English) course immediately, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶17

lA NO: 2 OF 2019:

¶18

Between:

¶19

The Registrar (ADlVlN) IGNOU, Rep. by its Registra(ADIVIN) lVlaidan Garhi,New Delhi -1 10008.

¶20

The Vice-Chancellor, IGNOU, [t4aidan Garhi, New Delhi-1 10008.

¶21

The Regional Director, IGNOU, Regional Centre, Kavuri Hills, Ir/adhapur, Hyderabad District.

¶22

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶23

AND

¶24

Pamulati Shreya, D/o.P. Syam Sunder reddy Aged. 28 years, Occ. Student (pursuing B.A) Enrolment No. 150008227,No. Flat No.6505, Panchavati Apts. Pragati Nagar,Qutubullapur, lr,4edchal Ir,4alkajgiri O'r,r'",...*rrroNDENT/pETtIoNER

¶25

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to vacate the interim' order dated 03-04-2019 in l.A.No. I of 2019 in W.P.No. 4558 of 2019 and dismiss the Writ Petition

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J. SREENIVASA RAO

¶27

Counsel for Respondents: SMT. A. CHAYA DEVI

¶28

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶29

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.4558 of 2Ol9

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶33

".... to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not declaring the results of AFWE Feature Writing in English, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Art 14 and 21 and of the Constitution of India, and consequently, direct the 1s' respondent to issue Original Graduation Certihcate of B.A. in Sociologr to the petitioner expeditiously and also direct them to pay the compensation for loss causing to the petitioner and for her mental agony and pass such other order or orders.,.,.."

¶34

Heard Sri J. Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Chaya Devi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents-IcNOU.

¶35

It has been contended by the petitioner that she got admission into 3-Year B.A. Degree oflered by respondent No.1 -^{IGNOUin January, 2015 vide enrollment No.150008227} and the petitioner has successfully compieted the course in the year 20 17 itself. But, the respondents are not declaring her results on the ground that she has opted same subjects as two optionals in B.A. Course. Challenging the said action of the respondents, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition

¶36

This Court was pleased to pass interim order dated 03.04.2019 directing the respondent-Universitv to declare the

¶37

AKS.., W.P.No.4558 of20l9

¶38

¶39

result of the^{petitioner in AFW-E (Feature Writingin English)} Course within^{two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of} the said order^{with a further direction that such declaration} shall abide by^{the ultimate resultof the writ petition and the} petitioner shall not^{claim any equities,if the writ petition is} decided against^her.

¶40

Learned counsel for^{the petitionerhad contendedthat} the respondents having^{allowed the petitioner to opt for} BEGA-I (Introduction to^{Media) Course as well as AFW-E} (Feature Writing in English)^{Course,they cannot now contend} that both the courses^{are one and the same.Learned counsel} for the petitioner, therefore,^{contends that writ petition be} disposed of directing^{the respondents to declare the results of} the petitioner and^{award B.A. Degreein her favour'}

¶41

Learned Standing^{Counsel appearing forthe} respondents-University had^{contended that though the} petitioner has to opt two different courses^{as optional in Final} Year B.A. Course, the^{petitioner has opted the same Courses} and that is the reason why,^{the result of the petitioner could} not be declared. It is^{also contended that though the} petitioner was offered to change^{the course fromAFW-E} (Feature Writing in English) to any^{other ApplicationOriented} Course in the^year 2018 itself,^{the petitioner has not chosen} to opt for any other course as^{one of the optional in III Year} B.A. Examinations. If the^{petitioner is willingto choose any} other course other than AFW-E^{(FeatureWriting in English)}

w P No 455E oir0l9

Course, the case of the petitioner would be considered and basing on her performance in B.A. Finaj year Examinations in the said newly opted subject, B.A. Degree would be awarded in favour of the petitioner.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner also expressed that the petitioner is willing to choose any other subject other than AFW-E (Feature Writing in English) Course as offered by the respondent-University.

¶47

This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondent-University to permit the petitioner to opt for any other optional course other than AFW-E (Feature Writing in English) Course in B.A. Final Year and also permit her to appear for B.A. Final Year Examination with the newly opted subject and basing on her performance in the said examinations, consider the case of the petitioner for awarding B.A. Degree.

¶48

With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶49

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

¶50

closed.

¶51

:-\

¶52

SD/- B.SATYAVATHI ASSI.TANT^REGISTRAR (1i) //TRUE^COPY// SECTION^OFFICER

¶53

To, 1 The Registrar^{(ADt\illN)IGNOU'Repby its Registra(ADl'4lN)tvlaidan Garhi' New Delhi} Hvderabad 2 3 i|.:ok';:[?H:"s,1;/,i3RBtYfit';lf,?31'i]::"?iIli'8s''f,;'hapur' 4. 5 Hil 3!^{B 3hi i'si: y3'3Jiin:::?3'i"!",i3ir} 6 Two CD^CoPies I/BC

To,

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0210212021

1 il E s 7a
o
I I tt8 2021 z:
f<br>*
.ti-4 r-.1}
ORDER

¶58

WP.No.4558 of 20'19

¶59

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶60

WITHOUT COSTS

¶61

){
-I ao0 e<br>I1 \o ,F {
)(.-

Pamulati Shreya v. The Registrar (Admin) Ignou

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pamulati Shreya v. The Registrar (Admin) Ignou

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

Esampelli Ravindar Vs State of Telangana and 3 others

Rayapaneni Maheshwar Naidu Vs Canara Bank

Gangarapu Venkataramana Vs Union of India and Another

Kurma Yadagiri Vs Gram Panchayat

K.Raja Rao , Jupally Raja Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Sana Educational Society Vs Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (Jntu)