Disposed¶30

P. Bhagyalakshmi v. State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC2 Jan 2025WP/22990/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court; WP No. 22990 of 2015; B.Ed. Category-B admission not approved by TSCHE communication dated 21.07.2015 (No. TSCHE/Secy/Rejection/B.Ed2014/OU-6-Def); Article 226 mandamus; Section 151 CPC interim application; writ petition closed as infructuous on 02.01.2025 by T. Vinod Kumar J.; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed; no substantive ruling on merits.

What did the court decide?

The cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for consideration of the Court any further; recording the same, the Writ Petition is closed as infructuous. ¶30

P. Bhagyalakshmi Vs State of Telangana… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁶ I

¶2

i I I I I

¶3

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

¶4

THURSDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETIflON NO: 22990 OF 2015

¶8

Between:

¶9

P. Bhagyalakshmi, D/o Venkataramana, Aged about 29 years, Fi/o Bandagpet, 37-44, Phase ll, Saroor Nagal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

Telangana State Council for Higher Education, Represeflted by its Secretaqy, Floor,JNTU Masab Tank Campus, Mahaveer Marg, Opp Mahaveer Hospitai Masab Tank, Hyderabad

¶14

Brindavan lnstitute of Teacher Education, Sagar Road, Sheriguda, lbrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that an the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased lo issue any appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing communication dated 21.07.2O15 vide No. TSCHE/Secy/Rejection/B.Ed2014/0U-6-Def thereby not approving the admission of the petitioner into B.Ed. course in Category-B in the 3rd respondent institution as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and set aside the same and direct the 2nd respondent to treat the petitioner as an approved admission in the 3rd respondent institution

¶17

l.A. NO: 1 OF 20 1s(wP MP. NO: 29715OF 20151

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances slated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear and write the examination of the B.Ed. course by suspending the operation of the communication issued by the 2nd Respondent daled 21 .O7 .20'15 vide No.TSCHE/Secy/Reiection/B Ed-2O14lOU-6Def, pending disposal of the writ petition

¶19

l I I I ,t t

¶20

t l I I i

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. P. SHRAVYAN^{REDDYREP.'FOR SRI. TARUN} G. REODY

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HIGHER^EDUCATION

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

i I I I I II I I t i ,I

¶25

¶26

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VTNOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.22990 of2015

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Ms.P.Shravyan Reddy, leamed counsel representing Sri Tarun G.Reddy, leamed counsel for petitioner submits that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for consideration of the

¶29

Court any [urther.

¶30

2 Recording sanre, this Writ Petition is closed as infructuous.

¶31

No costs.

¶32

i. As a scquel, rniscellaneous petitions pending if any shall

¶33

stand c loscd.

¶34

sD/-L. LAKSH Mt BABU ASS TANT^REGISTRAR