Disposed

Ammatul Subhan Asra v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Dec 2023WP/34029/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner sought a direction to the University of Health Sciences to consider her representation for BHMS counseling admission for the 2023-24 academic year. The bench directed the University to decide the representation within two days.

What did the court decide?

A direction to the University to decide the petitioner's representation dated 14.12.2023 within two days.

Ammatul Subhan Asra Vs State of Telangana — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

[^33e3 ]

¶3

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

¶4

MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEIT,IBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR^JUKANTI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 34029^OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Ammatul Subhan Asra,^{D/o Gulam MuoawarAli Aged18 years,Occ. Student,} R/o H.No.2-26.L.8. Colony,^{Makthal, Narayan pet Dist.-509208.}

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 State of Telangana,^{Rep by its Principal Secretary, Departmentof Health and} Medical and Family^{Welfare, Secretariat, Hyderabad.}

¶13

2 Kaloji Narayana Rao^{Universityof Heallh Sciences, Represented by its} Registrar, Warangal.

¶14

..RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the^{Constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith, the HighCourt may be} pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order^{or direction, one more particularly in} ih" natrre of writ of^{Mandamus,declaring lhe action of the Respondents,} particularly Respondent No.2, in nol considering^{the petitlonerrepresentation} dated 14:fl-2o23 for counseling^{and admissioninto BHMS Course under} Management^(B & C) Category^{for the academicyear 2023-24as itlegal'} arbitra-ry, unconstitutional and^{consequently directthe Respondentsto consider} the peiitioner representation^{to include her name for or nextroundof} counseling/stay vacancies^{for admission into the BHMSCourse Management(B} & C) Category for the academicyear^{2023-24 in next round of counseling'}

¶16

IA NO: 10F 2023

¶17

Petition under Section^'l 51^{CPCpraying that in the circumstances stated} in the affidavit filed in supporl^{of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to} issue interim directions directing^{the 2nd Respondentto consider the petitioner} representation daled 14-12-2023^{and allow to participate in the counseling under} Management^(B & C) Category^{for admissioninto the BHMS Coursefor the}

¶18

academic^{yeat2023-24for strayvacancies or next round of counselingpending} drsposal of the^{abovewrit petition.}

¶19

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRI SRINIVASA RAO PACHWA}

¶20

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo.1: GP FORMEDICAL, HEALTH & FW}

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.2:^{SRI A. PRABHAKARRAO,SC FOR KNRUHS}

¶22

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶23

¶24

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND

¶25

THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KT'MAR JIIKANTI

¶26

\vRIT PETITION No.34O29 of 2o23

¶27

ORDER: eer th.e Hon'ble the Chief JustiLe Atok ArudlE)

¶28

Mr. Srinivasa Rao Pachwa, learned counsel for^the petitioner.

¶29

Mr. A. Prabhakar Rao, Iearned Standing^Counselfor Kafoji Narayana Rao Universit5r of Health^Sciences (hereinafter referred to as the UniversityJ for respondent No.2.

¶30

With the consent of the parties, the matter is^heard frnally

¶31

In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks^a direction to the respondents to consider her^{representation} dated 14.12.2023 for counselling and admission^into BHMS Course under Management^(B &^C) category for^the academic year 2023-2024 in the^colleges affrliated^{to the} University.

¶32

¶33

Facts giving rise to filing of this Writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioner had appeared ir\ NEET-2023 examination and had secured A1l India Rank of 1105793. The petitioner had earlier applied for A Category seat, but she could not secure the same. Later as she was under the impression that one application was suflicient for Competent Quota seat and Management Quota seat, she did not apply for Management Quota seat. Therefore, the University is not considering her candidature for counselling and admission into the aforesaid course. In this regard, she has submitted the aforesaid representation to the University. He prays that the University be directed to decide the sajd representation in a time bound manner.

¶34

Learned Standing Counsel fairly submitted that the representation submitted by the petitioner shall be dealt with by the University in accordance with law.

¶35

6 . In vieu, of the aforesaid submission and in the peculia-r facts of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the University to decide the

¶36

¶37

¶38

representation submitted by the petitioner, dated

¶39

L4.12.2023, within a period of two (2) days. It is made

¶40

clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

¶41

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs

¶42

SDI A.V.S. P AD ASSISTANT REGI RAR

¶43

//TRUE COPY//

¶44

SECTION FFICER

¶45

To, 1, The Principal Secretary, Department of Health and Medical and Family Welfare, State of Telarigana,^{Secretariat, Hyderabad.}

¶46

z ftre neoistrar. Kaloii Na-ravana^{Rao Univeriity of Health Sciences, Warangal} 5 onL cCro sFil sRli\lvASA^{RAoPACHWA, Advocate} toPqql - + O"e CC io SRI^{A. PRABHAKAR RAO, SC FOR KNRUHSIOPUC]} ^ 5. il; ccsi" Gi^roR urotcnl,^{HEALTH& FW, High court for the stateof} Telangana. [OUT]

¶47

1. Two CD^Copies

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811212023

ORDER

WP.No.34029 of 2023

1 -{e STAr € o
c)
1
* D E.-,t,rAt ll

¶55

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

Ammatul Subhan Asra v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ammatul Subhan Asra v. State of Telangana

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

The Primary Fishermen Cooperative Society Limited Vs The State of Telangana

G.Jalandhar, Vs High Court of Andhra Pradesh High Court Buildings

Mothukuri Asherwadam, Khammam Dist Vs Settlement Officer and R.D.O., Khammam Dist and 7 Ot

Emmaji Mallanna Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Mohd. Ghouse Vs Telangana State Financial Corporation

M/s. Surya Seeds Limited, Vs The Union of India