Aouf Bin Sayeed Bin Siddig v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Dec 2023WP/26219/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition and an application under Section 151 CPC, the High Court observed that it was not necessary to decide the merits of the petitioner's grievance regarding admission difficulties without challenging the fresh speaking order dated 16.11.2023 passed by the Controller of Examinations, Osmania University. The Court closed the writ petition granting liberty to challenge the fresh order.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is closed with liberty to challenge the University's speaking order dated 16.11.2023. No order as to costs.

Aouf Bin Sayeed Bin Siddig Vs The State of… — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

132521

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALL! NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 262'19 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Aouf Bin Sayeed Bin Siddig, S/o Late Sri Sayeed Bin Salam, Aged about 25 yrs., Occ. Student, R/o 20-4-391/A, Himmatpura, Shalibanda, Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Through its Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Having office at T.S. Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Osmania University, Rep. by its Controller of Examinations, Having office at Osmania University Campus, Hyderabad.

¶13

J. Mahatma Gandhi Law College, Rep. by its Principal, Having office at NTR Nagar' LB Nagar' Hyderabad

¶14

...RE''.NDENTS

¶15

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 pass an order. direction or a writ particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the inaction on^part of the respondent no. 2 in taking action on the basis of complaint^given by the^petitioner on 219/2023, is^highly illegal. arbitrary and amounts to dereliction of duties. Consequently,^this Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 to conduct re examination for the^petitioner in Constitutional law ll, for the^{I year} ll^Semester. LLB 3 YDC course

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to^pass an interim direction thereby directing the respondent no.2 to^{immediately conduct}

¶18

re examination for the petitioner in Constitutional law ll, for the I year ll Semester, LLB 3YDC course

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. MOHAMMAD ADNAN

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: cP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2&3: SRI CH. JAGANNATH RAO, SC

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶24

WRIT PETITION No. 26 2L9 0F 2023

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶27

2. The prayer as sought for by the^petitioner in the present writ petition reads as under:

¶28

"To pass an order direction or a writ particularly in the nature of Writ oF Mandamus declaring that the inaction on part of the respondent No.2 in taking action on the basis of complaint given by the petitioner on 02.09.2023, is highly illegal arbitrary and amounts to dereliction of duties. Consequently, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct respondent No.2 to conduct re-examination for the petitioner in Constitutional law II, for the I year II Semester LLB 3 YDC course".

¶29

This Court, on 05.10.2023 has passed an order by observing as follows:

¶30

"Taking into consideration that the issue involves career of a student, the respondent No.2 is directed to take action on the complaint given on 02.09.2023 in accordance to law and pass appropriate orders, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of the

¶31

¶32

SN,J w.l'.No.262 l9 of 202i

¶33

copy of this order, and duly communicate the said decision to the petitioner.,,

¶34

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents brings on record the speaking order dated I6.|L2O23 issued by the Controller of Examinations, Osmina University, Hyderabad vide Proceedings No.i04/CoEp/Exams/2023 andcontends that the order of this Court dated 05.10.2023 had been complied with and a speaking order dated 16.11.2023 has been passed and communicated to the petitioner.

¶35

However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the speaking order dated 16.11.2023 issued by the Controller of Examinations, Osmina University, Hyderabad vide proceedings No.304/COEp/Exams/2023 are in clear violation of principles oF natural justice and contrary to the order of this Court dated 05.10.2023 passed in W.p.No.26219 of 2023.

¶36

Without going into the merits of the speaking order dated 16.t7.2023 the present Writ petition is closed giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the proceedings dated 16.ll.2023 issued by the Controller of Examinations, Osmina University, Hyderabad vide proceedings No.304/COEp/Exams/2023. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶37

¶38

SN,J W.P.No.262l9 of 2023

¶39

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ

¶40

Petition, shall stand closed.

¶41

sD/-P.PADMANABREt,EiRRX /

/TTRUE^COPY//

SECTI OFFICER

To,

1 Two CCs to^{GPFOR HIGHERTDUCATION'High Courtfor the State of}

¶46

u Ns eL toPu^c]

¶47

I ElI:EEIl^{#'3^flhhffi$iBft ff R.r#[i$ffi}

¶48

Two^{CD CoPies}

HIGH COURT

DATED:0411212023

1 e STAIA-
q
,t
:) o
o [ 5 Ji.\i ?t1[
I
i
llgS6rtn{C

¶55

ORDER

¶56

WP.No.26219 ot 2023

¶57

CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION
WITHOUTCOSTS

¶58

7
ab

Aouf Bin Sayeed Bin Siddig v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aouf Bin Sayeed Bin Siddig 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Guntoju Sadguna Chary Vs D. Venkateswarlu

Vemparala Rks Sharma Vs Sri N.Sridhar

Dr. M.A. Saiff Ali Vs Dr. Divvela Mohan Das

V.Venkateswarlu Reddy Vs The Government of Telangana

Echhareshwara J.V. Vs Indian Institute of Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors (Promoted by Irda, Government of India)

Mr. Mohd Aamer, Vs The Convenor-Sw-Ii