Telangana High Court
WP/17518/2015 of Iqballunisa Memorial Trust, Vs The State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretary on 31 December 2024
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRryFIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE T.VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO: 17518 OF 2015 Between: 1. lqballunisa Memorial Trust, Mdqdumpur Mllage,
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE THIRryFIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE T.VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 17518 OF 2015
Between:
1. lqballunisa Memorial Trust, Mdqdumpur Mllage, Karimnagar District, Rep byits Chairman Mohammed Abdul Maqfadir.its Chairman Mohammed Abdul Maqfadir.
2. Alexander College of Education, Maqdumpur Village, Karimnagar District,Rep by its Chairman Mohammed Abdul Maqfadir.Rep by its Chairman Mohammed Abdul Maqfadir.
3. Mr. Mohammed Abdul Maqfadir, S/o Mohammed Abdul Hadi, aged about 38years, Occ Business, R!/o Plot No.40, Maqdumpur Village, KarimnagarDistrict. \. \years, Occ Business, R!/o Plot No.40, Maqdumpur Village, KarimnagarDistrict. \. \.....PETIT]ONERS
AND
1. The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, School EducationDepartment Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.
2. The Cornmissioner & Director of School Education, State of Telangana,Hyderabad.Hyderabad.
3. The Director, S,C.E.R.T, Telanagana, Hyderabad.
4. The National Council for Teacher Education( NCTE), Rep, by its RegionalDirector, SRC, Nagarbhavi, Bangalore.Director, SRC, Nagarbhavi, Bangalore.
5. The National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), Hans Bhawan, Wing ll,Bahadurshah Zalar Marg, New Delhi, Rep by its Member Secretary.Bahadurshah Zalar Marg, New Delhi, Rep by its Member Secretary.
.....RESPONOENTS
Petition Under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one inthe nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 innot passing orders on the petitioners request to grant NOC and theconsequential action of the respondents 2\-- and in insisting upon the NOC forpleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one inthe nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 innot passing orders on the petitioners request to grant NOC and theconsequential action of the respondents 2\-- and in insisting upon the NOC for considering he application of petitioners for grant of additional intake for D.El.Edcourse in the rd petitioner institution as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutionaland consequently direct the respondents to pass orders on the petitionersapplication by issuing Noc and with a consequential direction to the respondents4 and 5 to forthwith grant additional intake of seats in D.E1.Ed course in favourof the 2nd petitioner institution.
!.A.NO:1 OF 201s [(WPMP.NO: ]22657 0F 20151
Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased todirect the respondents 1 to 4 to forthwith pass orders by issuing No objectioncertificate for additional intake of seats in D.E1.Ed course, pending disposal ofthe above writ petition.direct the respondents 1 to 4 to forthwith pass orders by issuing No objectioncertificate for additional intake of seats in D.E1.Ed course, pending disposal ofthe above writ petition.
I.A.NO:2 OF 2015 [(WPMP.NO:2]2658 0F 2015)
Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased todirect the respondents 4&5 to receive the application of the petitioners foradditional intake of seats inD.E1.ed course in the 2nd petitioner iiltitutibnadditional intake of seats inD.E1.ed course in the 2nd petitioner iiltitutibnwithout insisting on Noc frSom the respondents 1 to 4, pending disposal of theabove writ petition.
counsel for the Petitioners : Ms. D.DEEKSHA, ADvocATE FoR sRI p.pANDURANGA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Gp FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION
Counset for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 : SRI K.RAMAKANTH REDDYThe Court made the following ORDER
dl
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.l 7518 of20l5
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Ms.D.Deeksha, leamed counsel representing Sri p.panduRanga Reddy, learned counser for petitioner submits that the causein the Writ Petition does not survive for consideration of the Courtany further.any further.
2Recording same, rhis Writ petition is closed as infructuoirs.No costsNo costs 3As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any sfrlttstand closed SD/-K.MAJITRARASSISTANT [REG]
//TRUE [COPY//]
SEGTION [OFFICER]
To1. Two CCs [to GP FOR SCHOOL ][EDUCATION' ][High Court for ][the ][State ][of]' i"tinqrn, at Hyderabad IOUTI2d; ic i; Siii'p.Fnr'rou [fu-lrcn ][REDDY' ][Advocate ][{oPUCl]3. 5nI A [i6 ][Siiix.nertlnrnrlin nroov' ][Advocate ][toPucl]4Two CD [CoPies]SABS0n- HIGH COURT
DATED:31 11212024
ORDER
1HE [S ][14]\6lt:)01 11tE zil25\-s .1-':q-Yr \t::::.2[Jie7r1,,r.t ]-')/
WP.No.17518 of 2015
CLOSING THE W.P
AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT (rCOSTS.\\^\,r1Lop,-!)
*ri