Sahithi Kommidi Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Sahithi Kommidi Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of without costs: petitioner granted liberty to make a representation to Respondent No.2 (University) regarding her claim to exercise web options for MBBS/BDS admission, AY 2025-26, under 'B & C/NRI' category; University to consider the representation in accordance with law within two days; if web options are permitted, petitioner's case to be considered in the unfilled seats of the mop-up round; no opinion expressed on merits; miscellaneous petitions closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether Respondent No.2's action in not considering the petitioner's representation dated 26-09-2025 and not permitting her to exercise web-options in the ongoing or next phase of counselling into MBBS/BDS Courses under Management Quota (B Category, C-Category NRI) for Academic Year 2025-26 is arbitrary/illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 21A, warranting acceptance of the representation and permission to exercise web options. +1 more

Court's answer

The petitioner is allowed liberty to make a representation before Respondent No.2-University in respect of her claim for exercise of web options for admission into MBBS/BDS course for the academic year 2025-26 under 'B & C/NRI' category.

Ratio / Principle

On receipt of such representation, the University would consider the same in accordance with law within a period of two days.

Key takeaways

If the University allows the petitioner to exercise her web options, her case shall be considered in the unfilled seats in the mop-up round.ratio¶72
The Court expressly made clear that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.ratio¶73
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (Special Original Jurisdiction), W.P. No. 30299 of 2025, bench: Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin, decided 06-10-2025: A 19-year-old student (All India Rank 399214, OC) who, due to ill health, failed to exercise web options in the first phase of counselling for MBBS/BDS admission under management quota 'B & C/NRI' for Academic Year 2025-26 before the deadline on 24.09.2025 fixed by the notification dated 22.09.2025, filed an Article 226 writ petition against Respondent No.2 (Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences) challenging its non-consideration of her representation dated 26-09-2025 as violative of Articles 14 and 21A. Heard finally with consent of counsel; the writ petition was disposed of without costs: petitioner allowed liberty to make a representation to the University, which was directed to consider it in accordance with law within two days, and, if web options are permitted, her case is to be considered among the unfilled seats in the mop-up round. The bench expressly stated that no opinion was expressed on the merits. No precedent was cited; the disposition rests wholly on procedural directions.

la

t^348t l

I

f

I

t.

a

s

{

a

i

t

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

MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

.t

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN

WRIT PETITION NO: 30299 OF 2025

Between:

Sahithi Kommidi, D/o.Srinivas Reddy Kommidi, Aged 19 years, Occ. Student, R/o, 1-43, Brahmana Palle, Sub Dist, Bibinagar, Yadadri, Telangana-508126.

,..PETITIONER

AND

1 The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Medical &Health Family llfis Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad

Kaloji Nararayana Rao University of Health Sciences, represented by its Registrar, Warangal

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of 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 wrlt of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in not, considering the representation dated 26-09-2025, not permitting the petitioner for exercising web-options in ongoing or next phase of counseling into MBBS/BDS Courses under Management Quota (B Category, C-Category NRI) for the AcademicYear 2025-26, as arbitrary, illegal. u nco n stitutiona I and violative of Article 14,21A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to accept the representation dated 26-09-2025, and^permit the petitioner to exercise web-options for ongoing/next phase of counseling for B 86 C category into TMBBS/BDS course under management quota for the academic year 2024-25.

t

I a

I

I

t

{

t

n

a

i

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

a *

Petition undr:r Section .l 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit frled in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respond,:nt No.2 to accept the representation dated 26-09-20257 and permit the petrtione. to exercise web-options in ongoing/next phase of counseling into MBBS/BDS co.rrse for B and C category under management quota for the academic^year 2O2{i-26 pending disposal of the writ petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. ABDUL KABEER Counsel for the RespondentNo.l: SRI R. NAGARJUNA REDDY,

AGP FOR HEALTH, MEDICAL AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI T. SHARATH, SC FOR KNRUOHS The Court made the following: ORDER

n

) I

? I

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEFJLTSTICE SRI APARESH KT]MAR SINGH

AND

THE IION'tsI-IJ SRI IUSTICE G.M.NlOHIUDDIN Writ Pctition No.30299 of 202.5

Order,

N{r. Abdul I(abccr, learned counsel for the pcrirr,,ncr;

NIr. It.Nagarjuna Reddy, Iearned Assistant^(lor.ernment I)lcadcr

Ior [-[caltl.r, N'fedical and ItramLlv Welfarc l)cpartmer.rt appcrrrs lrrr rcspondcnt No.1 and NIr. T.Sharath, learncd Standing^(lotrnscl frrr l(aloji N-aravana Rao Universiry* of Health Sciences, appcars frrr rcspondcnt No.2 (hereina[ter rct-crrcd tc) 1l s, fll^(l Llnivcrsiry").

With the conscnt of the learned counsel for the parrics, thc matcr is hcard finally.

Pctidoner, a resident of Telangana State, obrainccl registration lor admission to MBBS/lll)S coursc, unclcr managcmcnt quota, for thc acadcmic ,t,car 21125-2(t. Shc, hacl sccurcd All India Rank 399214 ur.rder OC caregor'. Pctirioner contcnds that she submitted an application for a.lmission inro

2

N'IBBS/III)S coursc, tor thc academic^ycar 2025-26, undcr 'R & (l/N RI' quota with rcquisitc fce be fore thc^'cut-o[[ datc Hor.vcver. d,-re to ill health, shc could not exercisc web option in the hrst pl.r,rsc of counselling, for admission inr() MBBS/BDS coursc, undcr 'B & C/NlU quota' fcrr the academic^year 2025-26 bcfore 2:t-)0 p.m. on 24.09.2025, in terms of thc not-ihcation datcd 22.09.1025 (,\nncxurc P.1).

-1. ],earnc cl counsel [rrr thc petitior-rer submits that tod:u' is tl.rc last datc o[ counselling for admission into N4BBS/Course, under'B &^{(-/Nl{l'(]uota,} for the academic^ycar 2025-26.^'fhe pctitioncr lras approacl-red this Court since, evcn afltcr approachinr the L-irrir-crsiqv, her requcst was not cntertained

l,earrrcd Standing Counsel for the Univcrsin, has referred to thc notificadon datecl 22.09.2025. It is submrtted that tl.re notc and insr ructions to the candidates, categorically speci6, that the candiclet,:s in thc final merit list, s,-ho do not exercise rvcb options in thc first phasc o[ counscll-ing, shall not be cligrblc to

I \

cxercise rveb oprions in the subsequent phasc o[ counsclling to prevcnt seat blocking. Pctitioner is onc such candidate, u,ho^has not excrciscd her wcb options in thc hrst round o[ counselling nor has opted for admission into MBBS/BDS course under 'l]' categon', u,herc aflter onl1, she couid avail the remaining scrts r"rnclcr '(./NIU' cluota. Hc submits that the corriren,.lunr datcd 0-1. 1t1.2025 and 06.10.2025 permits fresh registratiotrs onlt' to such candidates, who had exercised web oprions.^'l'hereforc, tl-re pedrioner does not fit in the said category. He, horver-cr, submits that if the pctitioner makcs a representation, thc Llniversin rvt-ruld considcr it in accordance with lau,'.

Having considered thc submissions of learned counscl ior the petitioner as also the learned Standing counsel fbr Linivcrsitrand har.ing regard to the above facts and circumstrnces, pctitioncr is allowed libern, tc) make a rcpresentation bclorc rcsponclcnt No.2-Universin' in respect of her claim firr cscrcisc of u,eb options for admission into IvIBtsS/BDS course, [rrr thc acadcmic yel.r 2025-26, undcr 'B & C/NRI' categorr'. On

( (

J

i a

, a

-!

reccipt of sL ch rcpresentation, thc Unir,crsitv rvould considcr the

same in accordance vith lau, within a period of nvo davs.

,-. If thc Univcrsifi, allow. the petitioncr to excrcise hcr web

options, hcr casc shall bc considcred in the ur.rftllcd seats in the mop-up round.

Let rt be made clear that lvc have n<>t c:xprcsscd any opinion on the merits o[ the casc

f . i\ccor<lingly, thc \'rit Pcudon is disposecl o[. No costs

,\5 a 5cguel, miscellaneous petitions, pending i[ any, stand

closcd.

SD/-I:. PONNA KRISHNA ASSIIiTANT REGISTRAR

,TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

i

{'':t

I

To,

The Principal Secretary, Medical & Health Family llfis^{Department, Secretariat} Buildings, Hyderabad

The Registrar, Kaloli Nararayana Rao University of Health Sciences, Waranga I 3 One CC to SRI ABDUL KABEER Advocate [OPUC]

Two CCs to GP FOR HEALTH , IUEDICAL AND FAtvlll-Y WELFARE ,High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 5. One CC to SRl. T. SHARATH, SC FOR KNRUOHS [OPUC] 6 Two CD Copies BM BS @

I

s''1

I

t a

*;

t'1

t

t

e

I a.

i.

HIGH COURT'

DATED:06110t2025

ORDER

WP.No.30299 of 2025

..) S r^1
({.(
I 1,)
31 0CI P5 z
j
P^ IC !r t'_11

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

o
q wlu-
6

6

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Administrative action of Respondent No.2 (Kaloji Nararayana Rao University of Health Sciences) in not considering the petitioner's representation dated 26-09-2025 and not permitting her to exercise web-options in the ongoing or next phase of counselling into MBBS/BDS Courses under Management Quota (B Category, C-Category NRI) for Academic Year 2025-26, sought to be declared arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21A of the Constitution of India.¶28
Respondent No.2 - Kaloji Nararayana Rao University of Health Sciences (administrative action; no prior judicial decision identified) · 26-09-2025
Prior proceeding
Petitioner, a resident of Telangana, obtained registration for admission to MBBS/BDS course under management quota for academic year 2025-26.¶56
Prior proceeding
Petitioner secured All India Rank 399214 under OC category.¶56
Prior proceeding
Petitioner contends she submitted an application for admission under B & C/NRI quota with requisite fee before the cut-off date.¶58
Prior proceeding
Due to ill health, petitioner could not exercise web options in the first phase of counselling for admission under B & C/NRI quota before the deadline on 24.09.2025 fixed by the notification dated 22.09.2025 (Annexure P.1).¶58
Prior proceeding
Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the day of hearing was the last date of counselling for MBBS admission under B & C/NRI quota for AY 2025-26, and that the petitioner approached this Court because even after approaching the University her request was not entertained.¶59
Prior proceeding
Learned Standing Counsel for the University referred to the notification dated 22.09.2025, whose note and instructions to candidates specify that candidates in the final merit list who do not exercise web options in the first phase of counselling are not eligible for the subsequent phase, to prevent seat blocking.¶61
Prior proceeding
Standing Counsel further submitted that the communications dated 06.10.2025 (an earlier date illegible in the source) permit fresh registrations only to such candidates who had exercised web options, so the petitioner does not fit that category, and offered that if the petitioner makes a representation the University would consider it in accordance with law.¶62
Prior proceeding
I.A. No.1 of 2025 was filed under S.151 CPC praying that Respondent No.2 be directed to accept the representation dated 26-09-2025 and permit the petitioner to exercise web options in the ongoing/next phase of counselling for B and C category under management quota, pending disposal of the writ petition.¶40
Prior proceeding
With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter was heard finally.¶55