Disposed

Telangana Republican Party (Trp) v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Jan 2021WP(PIL)/8/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a PIL challenging institutional spot admissions for TS ICET-2020 without backlog results. Directed Respondent No. 1 to communicate a decision on the pending application to the Council within two days.

What did the court decide?

Two days' time granted to the Principal Secretary to communicate a decision on the application regarding institutional spot admissions.

Telangana Republican Party (Trp) Vs The State of… — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

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

¶2

IVONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY

¶5

WP(PIL) NO:8 oF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Telangana Republican Party (TRP), Rep, by its General Secretary and incharge of Telangana Republican Students Union (TRSU), A.Anand S/o.Maiaiah, aged ibout 34 years RTo.Nerellapally (V) Nampally Ir/andal, Nalgonda O'.tr'.r -UOtrllCli?i,orr*

¶8

AND

¶9

The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, T.S.

¶10

The Telangana State Council for Higher Education, Rep.by its Chairman and Secretary, Hyderabad.T.S.

¶11

The Commissioner, Technical Education and Convener, TSICET-2020 Admissions, Hyderabad. T.S.

¶12

.RESPONDENTS

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declaring the action of Respondents for conducting the TS ICET-2020(Ad missions) institutional spot admissions for admission into MBA and MCA courses before announcing the Degree backlog results in previous Semesters (First to Fifth semester) and already appeared for the said- examinations and waiting for the results which are expected to be announced by the end of second week of the January 2021 is illegal, unlawful, unjust and contrary to law and against the principles of natural justice and right to education, consequently direct the respondents to conduct special phase counseling for backlog students who are waiting for results, and securing an admission into I/BA and MCA courses in the interest of justice

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶15

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 respondents not to conduct TS ICET-2020(Ad missions) institutional spot admissions for admission into MBA and L/CA courses pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI YADISHWAR. N

¶16

Counsel for Respondent No. 1: SMT. C. VANI REDDY

¶17

GP FOR HIGHER EDUGATION

¶18

Counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3: SMT. P. SARADA

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

.//

TI{E HON'BLE^{THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI} AND

¶24

TIIE HO ,BLE RI JUSTIC E A. ABHI^{SHEK REDDY}

¶25

WRIT PETITION^(PIL )^{No.8 of 2021}

¶26

ORDER:^{(PertheHon'bletheChief Justice Hima Kohli)}

¶27

The present^{petition has been filed by the petitionerpraying} inter alia for^{declaringthe action of the respondents No'2 and 3 of} conducting TSICET-2020^{(Admissions)Institutionalspot admissions} into MBA and MCA^{courses,without taking any steps to announce} the supplementary^{examination results of the first to fifth semesters'} thus depriving^{the studentsof an opportunityto obtain admission into} MBA and MCA^{courses,as ilIegaland arbitrary'}

¶28

Ms. P. Sharada,^{leamed counselfor the respondentsNo'2 and 3} states that her clients^{had submitteda letter to the respondent} No.1/Special Secretary,^{HigherEducation Department on 04'01'2021} for passing suitable^{orders for permission to the respondent} No.2/Telangana State^{council for Higher Education for issuanceof} appropriate Notihcation^{and conducing counselling, but the said letter} is still pending at the^{end of the respondentNo'1 .} 3. Ms. C. Vani Reddy,^{leamed counselfor respondent No'l states} that the aforesaid letter^{was received by the Department only on} 08-01-2021, which is also^{ten days ago. However,the file is stated to} be still in circulation.

¶29

Page I oJ 2

¶30

W.P.(PIL).No.B of 2021

¶31

<br>

¶32

1 The respondent No. I is^{granted two days' time to conveyits} decision to the respondenls^{No.2 and 3 on the aforesaidaspect raised} in the letter dated 04-01-2021,^{lailing which this Court will be} inclined to pass adverse orders^{against the respondent No'l including} imposing costs.

¶33

5 The petition is disposed^{of on the aforesaidterms alongwith the}

¶34

pending applications, if^anY.

¶35

¶36

Sd/. K. SAILESHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ('ut \

¶37

SECTION OFFICER

¶38

To,

¶39

1 The Principal Secretary,^{Higher Eguc-ationDepartment, State of Telangana} s"irLiriili erilaings,^{ilyoeiroad, T.s.(By-specialMesseng-er/E'Mail)} .

¶40

1. i6" Cfiuii.i" andsbcietary,^{Teiangana-StdteCouncilfor Higher Education,} Hvderabad,T.S.

¶41

3 i# c;;;i;.i"ner, Technical^{Education and convener, TSTCET-2020 Admissions,} Hvd erabad. T.S.

¶42

4 Ohe CC to Sri Yadishwar.^{N Advocate} IOPUC] 5 i;; ccri" srt.^{c. vani nlaJv,-cC rb, High',er Education,Highcourtfor the State} of Telanqana. [OUTXBY^E-Mail) 6. o.;CCi; Sri.^{p. Sirloa, SC ior rscHE(oPUC)} 7. Two CD CoPies

MBC

HIGH^COURT

DATED:^1810112021

E s]?:'A,
({:;'7
c
oo ,19 JlN2o2t j
-4.
*
*r.,l t:

¶47

ORDER

¶48

WP(PIL).N^{o.8 of 2021}

¶49

DrsPoslNG^{OF THE WP(PIL)}

¶50

WITHOUT^COSTS

¶51

)^h

Telangana Republican Party (Trp) v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Telangana Republican Party (Trp) v. The State of Telangana

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

M/S Narne Constructions Private Limited Vs State of Telangana and 2 others

Goldripe International Private Limited Vs the State of Telangana and 4 Others

Sgs International Vs the State of Telangana, And 4 Others