V Surya Vs The State of Telangana

Lintampally Anvitha, D/o. Lingampally Srinivas, Aged about 22 Years, Occ. Unemployee, R/o. H No. 1133, Janga Reddy Gudem Thipparthi Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶10

Ganji Raju, S/o. Shivanandam Aged about 21 Years, Occ. Unemployee, Fl/o. H No. 1038, Puttapaka Narayanpur Puttapaka Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶11

Cholleti Tejasri, D/o Cholleti Srinivas Charry Aged about 21^years,Occ. Unemployee Fl/o.H No 778 Narketpally Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶12

Vasa Hemanth, S/o. V. Veerabhadra Rao, Aged about 22 Years, Occ. Unemployee, Fi/o. Sriram Colony Water Filter Saroornagar, Rajendranagar Mandal, Rangareddy District

¶13

...PETITIONERS

¶14

AND

¶15

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Govt, Higher Education Department, Dr B R Ambedkar Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana 500 002

¶16

The Director and Correspondent, Annamacharya lnstitute of Technology and Science (Autonomous) Piglipur Batasingaram Hayathnagar Manadal, Ranga Reddy Dist - 50'1 301

¶17

The Secretary, Telangana State Council of Higher Education Mahavir Marg, Hyderabad - 500 028

¶18

The Commissioner of Technical Education, Telangana State, Nampally, Hyderabad - 500 028

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

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 issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent^not issuing the petitioner's Original Certificates in spite of a requests by the petitioners is contemptuous, unjust, illegal, arbitrary, against the orders of this Hon'ble Court in and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and

¶21

f

¶22

consequently, direct the 2nd Respondent to return the petitioner's all original certificates such as Memorandum of Marks of lntermediate, SSC, Study Certificates, caste Certificates etc., immediately to avoid missing the Higher education opportunities

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶24

Petiticn under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2n( Respondent to return the petitioner's all original ce(ificates such as Memorandurr of Marks of lntermediate, SSC, Study Certificates, caste Certificates, etc., immediately to avoid missing the the Higher education opportunities Pending disposal of the Main Writ Petition

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. MANDRU SAMBASIVA RAO

¶26

Counsel for lhe Respondent Nos. 1,3&4: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Ms. M. SAI PRIYA REP

¶28

SRI P. PANDU RANGA REDDY, SC

¶29

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶30

: I 'I i : ! I I TII IIII

¶31

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE^{SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

Heard sri M. sambasiva^{Rao, Iearnedcounsel} appearing on behalf^{of the petitioners, learned Assistant} Government Pleader^{for Higher Education, appearingon} behalf of respondent^{Nos.1, 3 and 4 and Miss M.sai Priya,} learned counsel^{representingSri P. Pandu Ranga Reddy,} learned standing^{counsel on record appearing on behalf} of respondent^No.2.

¶34

¶35

prayer as under:

¶36

t....to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one^{inthe nature of writ of} Mandamus, declaring^{the action of the 2nd Respondent} not issuing the^{petitioners original certificatesin spite of} a requests by the^{petitionersin contemptuous,unjust,} illegal, arbitiary, against^{the orders of this Hon'ble} Court in and^{violafiveof ArticleL4 and 2tof the} constitution of India^{and consequently,direct the 2nd} respondent to return^{the petitioners alloriginal} certificates such as^{Memorandum ofMarks of} Intermediate, SSC, Study^{Certificates,Caste} certificates etc., immediately^{to avoid missing the} Higher Education opportunities^{and to pass order""'}

¶37

The case of the^{petitionersin brief is that the petitioners} got admission in^{convenerquota in the 2nd respondent college in}

¶38

2

¶39

SN, J wP 32480 2025

¶40

the ye:ar 2021 and joined CSE B.Tech by giving all necessary origine,l documents. The petitioners belong to SC and ST community. The government of Telangana is providing fee reimbu rsement scheme for the above categories. Upon completion of courses, the petitioners approached the 2nd respon'Jent for their original certificates, but the 2nd respondent refusec and rejected to issue the original certificates of the petitioners.

¶41

It is further the case of the petitioners that the petitioners submitted written representation to the 2nd respondent authorities to get back their original certificates, but the respondent authorities informed that the petitioners have to pay all the due amount and then only they will return all their certificat:es. The petitioners approached the Telangana State Human llights Commission and submitted their representation on 12.09.2Ct25 and requested to direct the 2nd respondent for return of their original certificates and the Telangana State Human Rights Commission has directed the 2nd respondent to return the petitioner's original certificates dated 16.09.2025. Despite the same thr: respondent authorities did not release the original certificates of the petitioners. Aggrieved by the action of the responderrts, the petitioners filed the present writ petition.

3

SN, J wP 32480 2025

4 :t TI

(A) The letter vide I r-No-O5OB /TGCHE/

3

24

"Sir,

Sub: - TGCHE Withholding of Original Certificates of the Students - Instructions to the Universities/Colleges- Regarding. Ref :- This office Lr. No. TGCHE/Fee Reimbursement /2024,^{dt.23.02.2024}

¶50

While referring to the subject and reference cited that in continuation of earlier letter, it has come to the notice of the Government that certain^pravate colleoes are withholdino

¶51

Withholding of original certaficates will have significant implications for the students, especially when they need to present these documents to^join for higher education, applying or^joining for^jo and other purposes.

¶52

Further, in terms of UGC (Grievance Redressal of students) Regulations 2018, the colleges are barred from withholding or refusing to return any document in the form of certificates of degree, diploma or any other award or other document deposited with it by a students for the purposes of seeking admission in such institution.

¶53

Therefore, I am by direction request the Unaversities to address/ instruct to all affiliated Private Colleges under its jurisdiction not to insist payment of Tuition Fee from the students who are eligible for fee reimbursement and not to deny issuing origina! certificates on the pretext of not receiving fee reimbursement from the Government. It is not a healthy

¶54

4

¶55

SN, J wP 12480 2025

¶56

practice. Such colleges may be blacklisted and shalt not be considered for free reimbursement, which wilt also affects affiliation of such colleges.

¶57

The Colleges shall be directed to follow the instructions of ttre Government scrupulously and failure in this regard will be viewed seriously and stringent action will be initiated against such colleges."

¶58

(B)

¶59

N

¶60

"2. The Commission is of the view that the In stitutions/Universities, by way of retaining the certificate in or ginal, force retention of admitted students which limits the opportunities for the candidates from exercising other options of joining other institutions of their choice. However/ it would not be permissible for institutions and Universities to

¶61

Th,e Division Bench of this Court in its Judgment dated 24.0L.2020 passed in W.P, No.21137 of 2019 in D.Vaashnavi vs. State of Telangana had struck down paragraph No.7 (iii) of G.O.Ms.l\o.114, dated 05.07.2017 i;€., original certificates submitted by the petitioner/candidate shall not to be returned to them, till they complete their course of study and appear for the Univt:rsity examination holding it as un-constitutional. A similar viow was taken by this Court in Mahatma Gandhi Law College, NTR Nagar, Hyderabad v. State of Telangana vrde Judgment dated 09.12.2022 passed in W.p.No.224L7 of 20t8. A Similar viow was also taken vrde Judgment of this Court dated

¶62

5

¶63

SN, J wP_32480_2025

¶64

2g.t0.2024^passed in^{W.P.No.25559 of 2024 in Lakshmi}

¶65

Saranya v. The State^{of Telangana.}

¶66

6 da d 24.O 7I.n tn^{W.P.No .21,137} 20L9 dealino with

¶67

u nder:-

¶68

"29. We are not expressing^{any opinion on the right of} the 3rd respondent-College^{to recover amounts towardsthe} entire course fee^{or the bondamount of Rs.3 lakhs from the} petitioner / her parent, but we^{hold that withholdinoher}

¶69

Therefore, the^{Writ Petition is allowed;the action of} the 3rd respondent-Coilege^{in not returning the original} academic^{qualification certificatesof the petitioner who had} discontinued study of^{M.B.B.S. Iyear course in the said} college, is declared as^{illegal,arbitraryand violative of Article} 14 and 3OO-A of the^{Constitution of India; Para no'7(iii)of} G.O.MS.No.114,^{Health, Medical and Family Welfare(C'1)} Department, dt.05.07.2017^{is declaredto be ultra viresthe} powers of the State Government^{under the Telangana} Educational Institutions^{(Regulation ofAdmissionsand} Prohibition of Capitation^{Fee) Act, 1983(Act 5 of 1983); and} the 3rd respondent^{is forthwith directedto return the original} academic^{qualification certificatesof the petitioner to her' No} costs. "

6

SN, J wP _32480]025

r

ti

R

The Hioh Court Mad as tn "K.Pala lsamv Vs.

¶76

oth m of Madurai Bench inWPt D) 207 26 of o19

¶77

rn

¶78

I

¶79

11.O 7.2(J19. it was h ld as un er:-

¶80

"8. There are method s of recovering the outstanding school fees with the school. No such suit has been instituted by Respondent School for the recovery of outstanding fees. 9.

7

SN, J wP 32480 2025

-it i-tl certaficates at anv rate. Even if the co leoe has anv

¶85

The Madras High Court in^R.Pradeep Raj v 'l ucata Commissioner, the Directorate of^Technical reported in 2019 SCC Online Mad.9385, and this Gourtⁱⁿ Kaluri Shiva Sai Teja vs. The State of Telanganaⁱⁿ W.P.No.293O of 2022, dated 24.O6.2022 and^D.Vaishnavi vs. State of Telangana, represented by its Prinicipal Secretary Health Medical and Family Welfare, H^ydeabad in W.P.No.21137 of 2O19, dated 24.OA.2O2O and also the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati in Andrha Pradesh Private Unaided Schools Management Association v. The state of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.96OG of^2o2tl dated 27.LO.2O21 directed the college^concerned authorities to return the certificates^{and granted liberty to}

¶86

8

¶87

SN, J wP _32480.2025

¶88

the <:ollege to ctaim fee by availing legat remedies in similar circumstances.

¶89

tBased on the Division Bench Judgment of this Court dated 24.O1.202O passed in W.p.No.21-1,g7 of 2019, this Court had allowed W.p.No.34185 of 2023 vide its order dated O3.O5.2024 granting identical relief as granted in W.P.No.21137 ot 2OL9.

¶90

L2. This Court opines that UGC by its guidelines (referred to and extracted above) had directed the Universities, to which the colleges; like the 3'd respondent are affiriated, to initiate action when such instances are brought to their notice and in spite of the aforesaid guidelines issued by the UGC, no action is being taken, and on the other hand, students, like the petitioner, are forced t. approach this court seeking return of originars and onry after or<lers are passed by this Court, the originals are being returned to the students, notwithstanding the fact that the colleges like the respondent No.3, have any claim towards fee, the said institutions are required to initiate proceedings for recovery of fee dues and cannot resort to withholding of certificat€'s of the students in vioration of the uGC guidelines.

¶91

9

¶92

SN, J wP 12480 2025

¶93

Learned counset appearing^onbehalf the petitioners mainly contends that the subject^{issue in the} present writ petition squarely covered by the order^dated O9.L2.2O22^passed in W.P.No.224L7^{ol 2O18 and also the} order dated 27.LO.2O25^{passedin W.P.No.324o4 ot 2025.} Learned counsel appearing on behalf^{of the2nd} respondent does not dispute the said^{submissionmade by} the learned counsel appearing on^{behalf ofthe} petitioners. o

¶94

This Court opines that the^{2nd respondent cannot withhold} the^petitioners' original certificates^{such as SSC, Intermediate} and Caste Certificates etc., under^{any pretext. There is no lien on} the certificate of the students^{since the certificate of the student} is his/her^property. This Court^{opines that the right of students} to obtain their Certificates from^{one institutionto join another} institution cannot be^{denied by the concerned authorities merely} because the tuition fee^{is due and if any amount is due from the} petitioners towards such fees, the^{proper courseavailable to the} respondents is to initiate^{appropriate proceedingsagainst the} petitioners for recovery before the competent^{Court and coercive}

¶95

l0

¶96

SN, J w? 32480 2025

¶97

tactics cannot be adopted by the 2nd respondent to make the petitioners pay the tuition fee. This Court opines that there is no justific.ation on the part of the 2nd respondent in withholding the original Certificates of the petitioners for non-payment of tuition fee.

¶98

A bare perusal of the record indicates that specific instructions vide Lr.No.050B/TGCHE/Refund of Originals/2024 dated 05.08.2024 had been issued by the Secretary, Telangana Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad to all the Registrars of Universities (referred to and extracted above) instructing all the affiliatecl Private Colleges within its jurisdiction not to insist on paymeni: of tuition fee by the students who are eligible for the fee reimbursement from the State Government. Further as per the guidelines of UGC, colleges cannot withhold or refuse to return any document such as of certificates of degree, diploma or any other award or other document deposited with it by students for the purpose of seeking admission in such institution. Thereforer duly taking into consideration the view of the various High Couts on the subject issue in various Judgments, referred to and e)(tracted above, this Court opines that petitioners are entitled f,rr grant of relief as prayed for in the present writ petition.

ll

SN, J wP 32480²⁰²⁵

\ \

r

¶103

(a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the

¶104

case,

¶105

(b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the^petitioners and^{the learn} counsel appearing on behalf of the^resPondents,

¶106

(c) The specific instructions vide Lr.No.OSO8/ TGCHE/Refund of Originalsl2O24 dated^{O5.08.2O24issued} by the Secretary, Telangana Council of^{Higher Education,} Hyderabad addressed to all the Registrars of^Universities (referred to and extracted above),

¶107

(d) The observations on the subject issue ining to withholding of original certificates of the students, by the Authorities concerned in the^Judgments of the various High Courts^(referred to^{and extracted} above),

¶108

(e) The UGC guidelines, dated 23.O4.2OO7,

¶109

The Writ Petition is allowed as^{prayed for. The 2nd} respondent is directed to issue the original^academic certificates of the^petitioners i.e., SSC,^Marks Intermediate, Study Certificates, Caste Certificates^{etc., to} the petitioners herein by duly taking into consideration

t2

SN. J wI_12480 2025

.L

the observations in the various judgments (referred to and e:<tracted above) and the specific instructions issued by the Secretary Telangana Councit of Higher Education, Hyderabad, vide Lr.No.O5O8/ TGCHE/Refund of Originals/2o24 dated OS.08.2O24 to all the Registrars of the Unriversities including the 4th respondent University herein (referred to and extracted above) and also the UGC guidelines, dated 23.04.2007 (referred to and extracted above),. within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shalt be order as to cost.

¶114

Th,e miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶115

closed.

¶116

//TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶117

To,

¶118

The Principal Secretary^{to Govt, HigherEducation Department,Dr B R} RmUeOt artelangana^{S6cretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana500 002}

¶119

The Dirt:ctor and^{correspondent,Annamacharya lnstituteot- lecnnologi ano} - Slience (nrtonomous) Piglipur Batasingaram Hayathnagar Manadal, Ranga Reddy tlist^- 501³⁰¹

¶120