Y. Sharath Chandra Reddy v. The State Of Telangana

1 AKS,J & RRN,J THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.41987 of 2022 ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili) This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: "...to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of respondents particularly the 2nd respondent in not permitting the petitioner for uploading NRI documents for counseling and admission into PG Medical course under Management Quota Category -2 in next round of counseling for the academic year 2022as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to permit the petitioner to upload NRI documents for admission into PG Medical course under Management Quota Category -2 in next round of counseling for the academic year 2022-23 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2.

Heard Sri V. Ramesh Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and A. Prabhakar Rao, learned Standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent University.

2 AKS,J & RRN,J 3.

It has been contended by the petitioner that he is MBBS graduate and he has appeared for the National Eligibility and Entrance Test (NEET)-PG and he has secured decent marks. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent University issued admission notification into P.G. course, but erroneously he could not opt for NRI quota i.e. MQ-2 quota. When the case of the petitioner was not considered under MQ-2 quota, the petitioner has submitted a detailed representation to the 2nd respondent University on 11.11.2022 but so far, the 2nd respondent University has not passed any orders on the said representation. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the Writ Petition directing the 2nd respondent University to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. 4.

Learned Standing counsel for the 2nd respondent University had contended that since the petitioner's representation is pending and the 2nd respondent University would consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 5.

Having considered the rival contentions raised by the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent University to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on

3 AKS,J & RRN,J 11.11.2022 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law within a reasonable period.

6.

With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

_________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J ______________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J Dt.17.11.2022 BDR/HK