Dismissed

Chinna Somya v. The Union of India

Telangana HC12 Jun 2023WP/2335/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge of the Telangana High Court closed the writ petition regarding non-issue of JEE Main admit cards without making further specific order after the matter was rendered stale by acceptance of applications for the January/February 2023 session.

What did the court decide?

Closed the Writ Petition without further order as the matter was rendered moot by implementation of interim directions for admit cards.

Chinna Somya Vs The Union of India — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

t^32s6l

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 2335 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Chinna Somya, D/o C. Jagadish, Aged about 17 years, Occ .Student,

¶9

Chinna Sanya, Dio C. Jagadish, Aged about 17 years, Occ .Student, (Both are represented by their father the petitioner No.3)

¶10

C. Jagadish, S/o Jangaiah Aged about 55 years, Occ .Advocate, Rt/o H.No.47 -226165, Sakethnagar, Yenne Pally, Vikarabad, Telangana - 501 101

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

The Union of lndia, Ministry of Education, Rep by principle secretary, Ministry of Education, New Delhi

¶14

The National Testing Agency, 1st Floor, NSIC-MD BP Building, Okhla lndustrial Estate, New Delhi.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia 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 Mandamus declaring the action of the official 2nd respondent in not scrutinizing the application and not releasing the admit card to appear in the exam for JEE (Main) session-ll2O23 is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unjust, against the principles of natural^justice and violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of lndia, and consequently allow the 1st and 2nd petitioners to appear the exam for JEE (\lain) session-l/2023

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶18

Petition un Je liection 15'l CPC praying that in the ,)ircuntstances stated in the affidavit fil€d r support of the petition, the Higl- Court 'nat be pleased To direct the official re^,ptndents to allow the 1st and 2nd pelit lners to appear in the JEE (Main) 20211 examination held between 28th Janrie.y to 1st February 2023, pending dispr: ral of the above writ petition

¶19

Counsel for the Peti ic,ners: SRl. M. VINOD KUMAR

¶20

Counsel for the Res rondents: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KTJMAR tty. SiOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

¶21

The Court made the lollowing: ORDER

¶22

I II

¶23

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MI'MMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.2335 of 2()23

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Though the matter is listed today under the caption "for dismissal", there is no representation for the petitioners.

¶26

It is brough t to the notice of this Court by Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for respondent No.l, that pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 27 .O1.2023 in W.P.No.2335 of 2023, the applications submitted by the petitioners were accepted and they were issued Admit Cards and they appeared for examinalions in question and results were also declared.

¶27

Since the purpose in the writ petition is already

¶28

served, no further orders need be passed in the writ petilion.

¶29

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

¶30

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶31

¶32

SD/. P. PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTAUIREGISTRAR //TRUE COPYil SECTTON OFFICER

¶33

To, 1. One CC to SRl. M VlNqq IU_IMAR Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRl. cADl PRAVEEN KUMAR Dy, SOL|C|TOR GENERAL OF rNDrA [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies KKS ^ GJPA^-

¶34

HIGH COUIl'"

¶35

DATED:12101'l',2023

¶36

--z:::.'::=-
r .-i i',.r ' -',re ci . .
,]I ],
I 1? i\l[ 2$z]

¶37

ORDER

¶38

WP.No.2335i of 2023

¶39

CLOSING THT WP WITHOUT CIf, S S

¶40

:\ (' N\F''r{'i\ ">

Chinna Somya v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinna Somya v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

fKorra Veerander Naik Vs Smt. Dheeravath Neha

Smt.Natasha Inani Vs M/s. C.S. Creamery Pvt.Ltd

Sri. S. Surendhar Goud and 9 others Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

B. Jyothi Kiran Vs CBI Acb

M.Jalapathi Vs The State of Telangana

Palle Sai Kiran Goud Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. and 4 others