Disposed

Sabavath Sai Charan v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Dec 2025WP/38123/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A student who secured an LLB seat sought directions against his engineering college for withholding original certificates citing unpaid fee reimbursement. Holding that students' certificates are their property with no lien, and relying on prior judgments and UGC guidelines, the court directed the college to return all originals forthwith.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.6 directed to return all original educational certificates of the petitioner forthwith; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

Sabavath Sai Charan Vs The State of Telangana — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

132521

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANOA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 38123 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sabavath Sai Charan, S/o. Sabavath Sreenivas, Occ. Student, aged 23 years, R/o. H.no.2-51 , Mantha Gowrelly Village, Yacharam Mandal Rang Reddy District 5015091

¶9

..PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad,

¶12

2 Telangana counsel for Higher Education, Rep. by its Chairman, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶13

3 The Registrar, Osmania University, Hyderabad.

¶14

4 Telangana Law Common Entrance fesl. 20225 (TG- LAWCET-2025), Represented by its Convenor Osmania University, Hyderabad Telangana

¶15

5 The Hyderbad Law College, Rep. by its Prinicpal, Uppal Hyderabad, Telangana. 500039

¶16

6 The Sri lndu College Engineering and Technology, represented by it principal, Sheriguda Village lbrahimpatnam lvlandal, Ranga Reddy, Telangana 500029

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

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 a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus

¶19

(r) Declaring the inaction of respondent no.6 in not issuing all originals SSC Long Memo, lntermediate Memo and Bonafide , Study certificate Vl to X, Community date of Birth Certificate , BTech Consolidate memo, Provisional Certificate and transfer certificate as being void,

¶20

arbitrary, illegal, without^{jurisdiction and without a'l horityof law apart} frombeingviolativeofArticlesl4'lgand265o.theConstitutionof India'andtoConsequentIydirecttherespondent'tissuethetransfer certificate any action^{taken pursuant thereto and I tss suchfurtheror} other orde(s) as this^{Hon'bteCourtmay deemfil and proper in the} circumstances of the^case

¶21

(ii) and violative of articles^{14, 19, 21 and 265of the cc rstitution of lndia.}

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶23

Petition under Section^{151CPC prayingthat in theCi} cumstances stated in the affidavit filed^{in supportof the petition, the High Court} may be pleased to direct respondents^{rlo 2 and no 5 to allow me to college wit 1} rut pressing for the all originals SSC^{Long Memo, lntermediate Memo and Bonai} le, Study certificate Vl to X, Community date of^{Birth Certificate B.Tech(l} rnsolidated memo, Provisional Certificate and^{transfer certificate pending dispos} rl of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise.^{the Petitioner will be put to severe loss} and hardship.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI NIMMALWAR PRAVEEN}

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.1 to 4: AGP FOR HIGHERt: )UCATION}

¶26

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶27

('l

¶28

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶29

WRIT PETITION No.38123 OF 2025

¶30

DATED: 16.12.2025

¶31

Between:

¶32

Sri Sabavath Sai Charan

¶33

...Petitioner

¶34

And

¶35

The State of Telangana and Others

¶36

Respondents

¶37

o RDER:

¶38

Heard Sri Nimmalwar^praveen, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assastant Government Pleader for Higher Education, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4.

¶39

The oetitioner a Doroached the Court seekino Draver

¶40

as under:

¶41

"...to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature oF a Writ of Mandamus i Declaring the inaction of respondent No.6 in not issuing all originals, SSC Long Memo, Intermediate Memo and Bonafide, Study certificate VI to X, Community, date of Birth Certificate, B.Tech Consolidate memo, provisiona I Certificate and transfer certificate as being void arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles

¶42

¶43

14, 1g and 265^{of the Constitutionof Inrl a and to} consequently^{direct the respondent toi;sue the} transfer certificate^{any actiontaken pursut r t thereto} and^pass such^{further or other ordersas tlr s Hon'ble} Court may deem^{fit and proper in the circunr ;tancesof} the case.

¶44

(ii) and violative of^{articles 14, 19,21 and ' 65 of the} Constitution^{of India and/orpass"'}

¶45

3 The ca se of the^peti tioner in brie f as Der the av rme einth ffi vit filed t E DE itioner^tn

¶46

wfl t Detitto^{n is as unt} !^::r: su DOrtofthep^resent

¶47

The^{pretitioner studied the course ofI} lE in the^6th respondent college^{from the year 2020 lo''l \24 under fee} reimbursement^{program and petitionercomll eted the said} course in due^time.

¶48

ItisflrtherthecaSeofthepetitionerth-."thepetitioner secured^{LLB seat in 5th respondent collegeand f rr joiningin the} said course,^{the 5th respondentdirected the peti ioner to submit} the requisite^{educational certificatesof the petit oner within the} prescribed time^{period. However,the 6th respc r dent ref used to} handover the^{petitioner his original certificates( n the ground of} non-payment^{of fee reimbursementby the sf i te government'}

¶49

¶50

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶51

4. PERUSED TH E RECORD

¶52

(A) The letter vide Lr.No.O5O8/ TGCHE/

¶53

efun f Ori nal 2 4 ted 08.2 2 tss b the Telanoa na Counci! of Hioher

¶54

Ed ucatio n, Hvdera bad add ressed to the Reqistrars of OU. KU, TU. GU- S U PU,

¶55

JNTU, ]NAFAU&T MVV is e tracte hereu nd er:

¶56

"Sir,

¶57

Sub:- TGCHE Withholding of Original Certificates oF the Students - Instructions to the Universities/ Colleges- Rega rding.

¶58

Ref :- This office Lr. No. TGCHE/Fee Reimbursement /2024, dt.23.02.2024

¶59

While referring to the subject and reference cited that in continuation of earlier letter, it has come to the notice oF the Government that certaln oflv te colleoes are withhol d inq h rt tn ertifi s on h e fn recetv inq fee reimbursement from the Govern ent.

¶60

Withholding of original certificates will have significant implications for the students, especially when they need to present these documents to join for'higher education, applying or joining for jobs and other pu rposes.

¶61

Further, in terms of UGC (Grievance Redressal of students) Regulations 2019, 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.

¶62

¶63

¶64

Therefore, I am by direction^'equest the Universities to address/ instruct to all affi iated Private Colleges under its^jurisdiction not to insi:;^paymentof Tuition Fee from the students who are el^gible for^fee reimbursement and not to deny^isst ing^original certificates on the pretext of not r':ceiving^fee reimbursement from the Government. It is rot a^healthy practice. Such colleges may be blacklisted 'rnd shall not be considered for free reimbursement,^w liich will^also affects affiliation of such colleges.

¶65

The Colleges shall be directed to follow the inst-uctions^{of the} Government scrupulously and failure in this^{egard will be} viewed seriously and stringent action will be^{I itiated against} such colleges.^"

¶66

(B) UGC^quide nes. dated 23.O4.2^oo7. _ n Darticular,

¶67

paraqra h No.2 reads as under:

¶68

"2. The Commission is of the vir: I that the Institutions/Universities, by way of^{retainingtt- 3 certificate in} original, force retention of admitted^{studentsv hich limits the} opportunities for the candidates^{from exercising, ther options of} joining other institutions of their choice. Howevr r, it would not be permissible for institutions and^{Universitier; to retain the} School/Inst itution. Leavino Ce ificate.^ma r(^sheet,caste certif te and othe r documents in ori o ina l.

¶69

In^pursuance to the directions of^{this Court dated} 10.t2.2O25, the learned counsel^{appearing on behalF of the} petitioner harl taken out personal notice to the rt:^;pondentNo.6 herein and filed proof of service of the sail^{notice upon} respondent No.6 vrde Memo dated^70.12.2025 du'^{enclosing the} original^postal track report evidencing the^{sarr r} .^{Though the}

¶70

) )

¶71

)

¶72

matter is listed today i.e., on t6.72.2025, yet there is no representation on behalf of the respondent No.6 when the case is called on 16.12.2025.

¶73

The Division Bench of this Court in its ludgment dated 24.01.2020 passed in W.P. No.21137 of 2019 in D.Vaishnavi vs. State of Telangana had struck down paragraph No.7 (iii) of G.O.Ms.No.114, dated 05.07.20t7 i.e., original certificates submitted by the petitioner/candidate shall not to be returned to ihem, till they complete their course of study and appear for the University examination holding it as un-constitutional. A similar view was taken by this Court in Mahatma Gandhi Law College, NTR Nagar, Hyderabad v. State of TLlangana vrde Judgment dated 09.12.2022 passed in W.p.No.22417 of 201a. A Similar view was also taken vrde Judgment of this Court dated 29.t0.2024 passed in W.P.No.25559 of 2024 in Lakshmi Saranya v. The State of Telangana.

¶74

A Divisi n Bench of this Court vide its i dqment, o1.2 2 .P.No.211 7 f dealin wl withholdin q of oriqinal academic oualification certaficates of the tudents obse ed at oarao raoh Nos. 29 and30as

under:-

We are not expressing any^{opinion on the r t ht of the 3rd} respondent-College to recover amounts^{towa-, s the entire} course fee or the bond amount of^{Rs.3 lal rs from the} petitioner / her parent, but we hold that will^rholdinqher orioinal academ ic oualificatio cer'l I i'icates, ls rm issib nl

¶79

30 Therefore, the writ^{Petilion is allowed;thr: action of the} 3rd reslondent-College in not returning^{the orlg nal academtc} qualification certificates of the^{petitionerwhoh:Lr discontinued} study of I\4.8.8.S. I^{year course in the said colle r e, is declared} as illegal, arbitrary and violative^{of Article14 arrr 300-Aof the} Constitution of India; Para^{no.7(iii) of G.O.14S,lJ r'114, Health,} Ivledical and Family Welfare^{(C.1) Department,lr:.05.07.2017} is declared to be ultra vires^{the powers rfthe State} Government under the^{TelanganaEducatiorrr iInstitutions} (Regulation of Admissions and Prohibition of^{: rpitationFee)} Act, 1983^(Act 5 of 1983); and^{the 3rd rlrsDondent is} forthwith directed tor urn the orto r rI^rrl academic qu alif ication certificates of the Det ition€! to her.^No costs

¶80

The D ivision Bench^{verv clearlvobs,} I "ved^that with holdino the oriqin^I academ rc cll ralification certificates of th^{e students islmoermtss ible_rn law.}

¶81

The High Court of^{Madras inK.Pir ianisamy Vs'} Correspondent, Vidya^{Vikash Matriculatior r School and} Others of Madurai Bench^{in WP (MD) 2( 726 ol2OL9} decided on 17.1O.2O19 reported^{in MANU/Tl'l/6538/2OL9,}

¶82

)

¶83

¶84

held that certificates of students could not be held back by educational institutions citing financial dues.

¶85

Int he Judo ent of t e Hioh ourt of elhi in ou rt on its own Motion Vs. D !rectorate of Educa tion & Ors. in wP^(c) 66s of 2019 & CM APPL.3O 816. O of 2019, d ated

¶86

LL.O7 .20L9, itwas held as under:-

¶87

"8. There are metho ds of recoverin g the outs tanding school fees with the school .Even a suit could ha ve been filed hv esnonde ntN o 2rt on the are nts of the stud nts. wh ic h has not been done so far. No such su it has been instituted by Respondent School for the recovery of outstanding fees. 9. vi hese f rhi ts f o tnt that the School Leavinq Certificates cann tbe ithh th nd n

¶88

rn S.Muth uk matchi vs. The Directo r of Tech nical Educatio n, Anna Unive rsitv in w.P.(MD) NO.1439 4of 2()L2 dated 1 8.12.20 2, the Madras Hiqh Court at Mad rai Bench cateoorica llv held that certificates of stud nt is her/ his orooe rtv. Colle e cannot detain the said certi rcates at anv rate. Even f the colleoe has anv moneta rv claim. the refu Ito handov r the said certificates to the students s not the method bv whic the cla imcanbee nforced. There is no lien on he certifi cates of the students

,:i

The Madras High Court in^R.Prac eep Raj^v. Commissioner, the Directorate of Technic'rl^Education reported in 2019 SCC OnLine Mad.9385, anrl this Courtⁱⁿ Kaluri Shiva Sai Teja vs. The State of^{'elangana in} W.P.No.293O ot 2022, dated 24.06.2022 arll^D.Vaishnavi vs, State of Telangana, represented by its^Principal Secretary Health Medical and Family Welfarr:,^Hyderabad in W.P.No.21137 of 2019, dated 24.OL.202ll and also^the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravi ti in^Andrha Pradesh Private Unaided Schools Manageme^{t rt Association} v. The State of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.9 606 of^2021, dated 27 "LO.2O2I directed the^collecl, t^concerned authorities to return the certificates of the students^and granted liberty to the college to claim fee b1r availing legal remedies in similar circumstances.

¶93

L2, Based on the Division Bench Judgment of this^Court dated 24.O1.2020^passed in W.P.No.2Lt37 of^{2019, this} Court had ailowed W.P.No.34185 of^{2023 'ride its order} dated O3.06.2024^{granting identical relief ls grantedtn} W.P.No.21137 ot 2OL9.

¶94

¶95

This Court opines that^{UGC by its guidelines(referredto} and extracted above)^{had directedthe Universities,to which the} colleges like the 6th^{respondent are affiliated, to initiate action} when such instances are^{brought to their notice and in spite of} the aforesaid^{guidelines issued by the UGC,no actionis being} taken, and on the other^{hand, siudents, like the petitioner, are} forced to approach this Court^{seekingreturn of originals and only} after orders are^{passed by this Court, the originalsare being} returned to the students,^{notwithstandingthe fact that the} colleges like the respondent^{No.6, have any claim towards fee,} the said institutions are^{required to initiate proceedings for} recovery of fee dues and^{cannot resort to withholdingof all} certificates of the students^{in violation of the UGC guidelines'}

¶96

L4. The learned counsel^{appearingon behalf of the} petitioner submits that the subject^{issue in the present} writ petition is squarety^{covered by the order of this} Court, dated O8.1O.2O25^{passedin W.P.No'25952ot 2025} and the order dated^{27.LO.2O25passedin W'P' No'324O4} ot 2O25. The learned^{AssistantGovernment Pleaderfor} Higher Education, appearing^{on behalf of respondents} does not dispute the^{said submission madeby the learned} counsel appearing on behalf^{of the petitioner'}

l l l

I CU SI N NDC USION

This Court opines that the responde I No.6 cannot withhold the petitioner's originar educatic r ar certificates submitted by the petitioner under any pretext. -here is no rien on the certificate of the students since the ce rtificate of the student is his/her property. This court opines lrat the right of students to obtain their Certificates from one ir: titution to join another institution cannot be denied by the conce r red authorities merely because the tuition fee is due and if an), amount is due from the petitioner towards such fees, the )roper course available to the respondents is to initia i r appropriate proceedings against ihe petitioner for recove ry before the competent C,lurt and coercive tactics cannot be r lopted by the respondents to make the petitioner to pay the rl tion fee. This Court opines that there is no justification on t 1 I part of the respondent fJo.6 in withholding all originals i.e ., SSC Long Memo, Interntediate Memo and Bonafide, Study ce rtificate VI to X, Community, date of Birth Certificate, B.Tec t Consolidate memo, Provisional Certifica te and transfer certi icate of the petitioner for non-payment of tuition fee.

¶101

¶102

¶103

A bare perusal of the^{record indicatesthe specific} instructions vide 1r.No.0508/TGCHE/Refund^{of Originalsl2024} dated 05.08.2024^issuedby the^{Secretary, Telangana Council of} Higher Education, Hyderabad addressed^{to all the Registrars of} Universities (referred to and extracted^{above)indicates that} specific instructions had been^{issued by the Government} instructing all the affiliated Private^{Colleges withinits jurisdiction} not to insist on^payment 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 cannotwithholdor} refuse to return any document^{such as of certificatesof degree,} diploma or any other award or^{other document depositedwith it} by students for the^purpose of^{seeking admission in such} instituiion. Therefore duly taking^{into consideration the view of} the various High Courts on the^{subiect issue in various} Judgments, referred to^{and extracted above, this Courtopines} that petitioner is entitled^{for grant of reliefas prayedfor in the} present writ Petition.

¶104

Takinq into consideration:

¶105

(a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances^{of the}

case,

)

(b) The submissions of the lear ned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, an( the lea rned Assistant Government pteader for Higlr )r Education appearing on behalf of the respondents,

¶110

(c) The specific instructi: ns vide Lr.No.O5O8/TGCHE/Refund of Originals,/ 2024 dated 05.08.2024 issued by the Secretary, Telangl na Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad addressed to all the Registrars of Universities (referred to a r,rd extracted above),

¶111

(d) rhe observations made in variorr.; Judgments (referred to and extracted above),

¶112

(e) The UGC Guidelines dated 23.D4.2OO7, in particular, paragraph No.2 (referred to ar d extr.acted above),

¶113

The writ petition is disposed of cl recting the respondent No.6 to return the originar educationar certificates i.e., SSC Long Memo, Intermediatr: Memo and Bonafide, Study certificate VI to X, Commur ity, date of Birth Certificate, B.Tech Consolidate memo, provisional Certificate and transfer certificate of the petit:r oner, which are in the custody of the respondent No.6, dull taking into

¶114

¶115

¶116

consideration the observations made in various Judgments (referred to and extracted above), and the specific anstructions vide Lr,No.O5O8/TGCHE/Refund of Originals,/2O24 dated 05.O9.2024 issued by the Secretary, Telangana Councit of Higher Education, Hyderabad addressed to all the Registrars of Universities (referred to and extracted above), and also the UGC Guidelines (refer,.ed to and extracted above) forthwith. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶117

Miscellaneous petitions. if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶118

The miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶119

closed.

¶120

SD/. U.SUDHA ISTANT REGISTRAR* //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶121