Dismissed

Animisha Muppidi Reddy v. Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC20 Jan 2023WP/21012/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a minor seeking admission to private medical colleges with additional weightage/separate quota under specific categories, holding the petition infructuous due to the passage of time and the end of the academic year.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to seek admission within the general guidelines or by other available means as the specific plea regarding waivers is no longer viable.

Animisha Muppidi Reddy Vs Government of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^321e ]

¶2

I I I

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

FRIDAY THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURA3LE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 21012 OF 2013

¶9

Between:

¶10

Animisha IVIup D R/o H No.3-6-4 39/A,^{idi Reddy,} Himayathnagar, Hyderabad-500029^{D/o.M.Vidyanath ReddyAged about 18 years,}

¶11

PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

1 Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep by its Principal Secretary, Health. Medical & Family Welfare (El ) Department, Secretariat Buildings. Hyderabad

¶14

The [,4edical Council of lndia Rep. by its Secretary,, Pocket- 14 , Sector - 8. Dwarka Phase -1. New Delhi - 110077 .

¶15

Government of lndia Minis try of Human Resource Development. Rep. by its Secretary, Shastri Bhavan ,New Delhi11000'1.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

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 lssue Writ of Mandamus declaring the G.O.Ms.No.97 dated 06.07.2013 to the extent of not providing weightage or separate quota under category "C(1) & C(2)" of G.O.Ms.No.97 dated 06.07.2013 for CBSE students from the Andhra Pradesh state seeking admission into Private Medical Unaided Medical and Dental Colleges under Management Quota and NRI quota in the state of Andhra Pradesh as illegal, unconstitutional and violative of article 14, 16 & 21 of Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the 151 respondent to follow the guidelines of the 2nd respondent^"Medical Council of lndia" and provide additional waeghtage or separate quota under category "C(1)& C(2)' of G.O.Ms.No.97 dated 06.07.2013 for CBSE students from the Andhra Pradesh state seeking admassion into Private

¶18

Medical Unaided lt/edrcal and Dental Colleges under Management Quota and NI\4 quota in the state of Andhra Pradesh

¶19

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 257s2 OF 2013)

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed rn support of the petrtion, the High Court may be pleased direct the 1st respondent to consrder the representation of the petitioner dated 08th July, 2013 for admission into the medical college for the academic year 2013-2014 as per the Medical Council of lndia guidelines. failing which the petitioner will suffer grave and irreparable loss.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. K RAMAKANTH REDDY

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MED HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRl. CHALLA GUNARANJAN, SC FOR M.C.l

¶24

Counsel forthe Respondent No.3: SRl. cADl PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶26

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION No.21O12 of 2OL3

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

There is no representation on behall of the petitioner.

¶29

However, on going through the Writ Petition and the prayer made by the petitioner, it is noticed that the petitioner was seeking additional \veightage or allot a separate quota for CBSE students under categol-!' C(1) & C(2) of C.O.Ms.No.97 dated 06.O7.2O13 and therefore, the petitioner u,as seeking admission into Private Unaided Medical and Dental Colleges under Management quota and NRI quota for the year 2014 and due to passage of time, the Writ Petition has become infructuous.

¶30

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶31

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

¶32

SD/-B. CHANDRA PRAKASH ASS|STAT REG|STRAR / //rRUE COPY// LfrS / SECTION OFFICER

¶33

To,

¶34

One CC to Sri. K Ramakanth Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

¶35

One CC to Sri. Challa Gunaranjan, SC for M.C.l, [OPUC]

¶36

One CC to Sri. Gadi Praveen Kumar, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia, loPUcj

¶37

Two CCs to GP for Medical Health and Family Welfare, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶38

Two CD Copies

" t\tK

HIGH COURT

DATED:2010112023

ORDER

WP.No.21012 ot 2013

,6 1E L4{
li //.5k' s 7*
!ia ou
rl r
iF s= o
t! A c<br>11 (J t<br>\I,. .4
.-!

¶46

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS.

¶47

@r&AJu

Animisha Muppidi Reddy v. Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Animisha Muppidi Reddy v. Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Bhaskar Reddy, Vs The Principal Secretary Irrigation Department

Venkateswara Mphw (F) Training Institute, Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Ahsan Hussain Khan Vs The State of Telanagana

Smt. Asama Khatun Vs The State of Telangana

Mandadapu Ramakrishna Vs The Government of A.P.

M/s Sai Ramana Metal Industries Vs State of Telangana