Disposed¶30

The State of Telangana v. The State of Telangana

Admission – NEET-PG 2024 – Management Quota MQ-2 (NRI category)

Telangana HC18 Mar 2025WP/8273/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court writ petition under Article 226 by a doctor seeking consideration for PG Medical/Diploma admission (AY 2024-25) under Management Quota MQ-2/NRI category after omitting the MQ-2 option in his NEET-PG 2024 application; KNRUHS directed to decide his 17.03.2025 representation within seven days; petition disposed of without merits opinion or costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 (KNRUHS) to decide the petitioner's representation dated 17.03.2025 in accordance with law expeditiously, not beyond seven days; writ petition disposed of with no order as to costs and pending interlocutory applications closed. ¶30

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

¶1

[^3lf46 ]

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEEruTH^{dNV OF MARCH} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING^{CHIEFJUSTICE SUJOY PAUL} AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE^{RENUKA YARA}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:8273^{OF 2025}

¶7

Between:

¶8

Dr. Mohammed Najmuddin^{Khurram,S{o. MoldSira.iudd} in Patel, Aged 32 vears. Occ: Doctor,'R:/o.^{4-601 I 1 221 N 1 19, sanghtrashwadi,} MG Road, GNTC Colbge, Sangtrashwadi, Gulbarga,^{Karnataka, 58510'l.}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana,^{represented by its Principal Secretary,Med.ical and} Heiftn family Welfire Dep'artment,^{Seiretariat BuildingsHyderabad} ..

¶12

Z kafoii Nararayana Rao Uriiversity^{of Health Sciences, represented by its} Registrar, Warangal, Telangana.

¶13

...RES'ONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of^{thd Constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filed therewith, the High courtmay be} pleased to issue directions, orders, more^{so, a writ,in the nature of Mandamus, by} declaring the inaction of^{the respondents, more particularly the 2nd respondentfor} not considering the^{petitioners request for ADMISSION UNDER MANAGEMENT} oUoTAMQ.2i.e.,isNRlCategoryinpresentphaseofcounsellingtopursuepost graduate Medical/Diploma courses for^{the academic year 2024-2025as arbitrary,} illegal and unconstitutional^{and consequently directingthe respondents to consider} and permit the^{petitionerfor ADMISSION UNDER MANAGEMENT QUOTAMO-2} i.e., is NRI Category to^{pursuepost graduate Medical/DiplomaCourses in} academic year 2024-2025^{in present phase of counseling'}

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶16

Petition under section^{151 CPC praying thatin the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in^{support of the petition, the High courtmay be pleased pleased}

¶17

l I

¶18

to direct the 2nd respondent to consider. my representation and permit the petitioner for ADMISSION UNDER MANAGEMENT oUoTA MQ-2 i.e., is NRI category to pursue post graduate Medicar/Diproma courses in academic year 2024-2025 in next phase of counselling, during'the pendency of the above writ petition.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D.S.KISHEN Counsel for the Respondent No.1: cp FOR MEDICAL HEALTH & FW Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI T.SHARATH, SC FOR KNRUHS

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

I 0

¶22

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CTIIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL

¶23

AND

¶24

THE HON'BLE SMTJUSTICE RENUI(A YARA

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.8273 of 2025

¶26

ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog Poul)

¶27

Sri D.S.Kishen, learned counsel for the petitioner ald Sri T.Sharath, learned Standing Counsel for Kaloji Narayana Rao \ University of Health Sciences for respondent No.2.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is eligible for Management Quota (MQ-2) category i.e., NRI category, but erroneously he has uploaded the application for Post Graduate Courses (NEET-PG 20241 and has not selected the option for MQ-2. After having reafized the mistake, the petitioner has already preferred a representation on 17.O3.2O25, which may be directed to be decided by respondent No.2 expeditiously

¶29

Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 has no objection for this innocuous prayer.

¶30

Accordingly, respondent No.2 is directed to take a decision on the said representation in accordance with law expeditiously, but not beyond seven days from today.

¶31

¶32

With the above direction, the Writ Petition^{is disposed of,}

¶33

without expressing any opinion^on merits.^{Theresha'll be no order}

¶34

as to costs.

¶35

Interlocutory appiications, if^{any pending,shallstandclosed}

SD/. N.RAJAGOPAL

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

N OFFICER

1 The Principal {iecretary, Medical and Health Family Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad, State of Telangana

¶42

2 Regiskar, Kaloji Nararayana Rao University of Health Sciences, Warangal, Telangana.

¶43

3 One CC to SRI D.S.KISHEN, Advocate [OPUC]

¶44

4 Two CCs to GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH & F\A/, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] 5 One CC to SRI T SHARATH, SC FOR KNRUHS [OPUC] b Two CD Copies PSK. PSK

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:18 l03t20?s

ORDER

WP.No.8273 ol 20Zs

;l1ATE O
7
Ni
7pt
tt \$
:)l,) .I
o
^_c;
i
-;:.-" --;2