Telangana High Court
WA/465/2008 of Deccan Collegeof Engineering AND Technology, Vs A. Manas Reddy, on 26 December 2008
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT APPEAL No. 465 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMAand
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH
WRIT APPEAL No. 465 of 2008
(Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated12/03/2008 in WP NO : 23863 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.)12/03/2008 in WP NO : 23863 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.)
Between:
Deccan Collegeof Engineering & Technology, Dar-us-salam,Hyderabad - 500 001, rep. by its Principal.
..... APPELLANT
AND
1 A. Manas Reddy, S/o. A. Surendera Reddy, IV Year B.E-E.E.E. Student, Deccan College of Engineering & Technology, Dar-us-salam, Hyderabad - 500 001.
2 Osmania University of Tarnaka, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Registrar.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellant : MR.K.G.K.PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : MR.B.VISWANATHA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : MR. DEEPAK BHATTACHARJEE
The Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R. VARMAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAHWRIT APPEAL No.465 of 2008
ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma)
Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant-College as wellas the learned counsel for the first respondent-writ petitioner and also thelearned Standing Counsel for Osmania University, appearing forrespondent No.2.
2. This writ appeal is filed by the Deccan College of Engineering &Technology, Dar-us-Salam, Hyderabad, who is the second respondent inthe writ petition, aggrieved by the order, dated 12-03-2008, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court inW.P.M.P.No.4907 of 2008 in W.P.No.23863 of 2007, permitting thepetitioner to appear for the final examinations of the second Semester of IVYear B.Tech./B.E. course and directing the first respondent-University todeclare the results of the said examination.
3. Appellant is the second respondent-College and respondentsare the writ petitioner and the Osmania University, respectively.
4. For the sake of convenience, in this judgment, the parties will bereferred to as per their array in the writ petition.
5. The entire controversy is relating to the eligibility of the petitionerto appear for the examinations of second Semester of IV Year B.Tech./B.E. course.
6. It appears that the petitioner did not secure the required number ofdays of attendance to appear for the final examinations of second Semester of IV Year B.Tech./B.E. course pursuant to his participation insports activities. It is not in dispute that he brought Medals to the secondrespondent-College in the year 2006. As a result of his participation insports activities in that particular year, there was a shortage of attendanceand, therefore, he was not permitted to appear for the First Semester of IVYear B.Tech./B.E. course, which resulted in filing of the writ petition by thepetitioner.
7. A learned single Judge of this Court, by order, dated 12-11-2007, passed in W.P.M.P.No.31083 of 2007, permitted thepetitioner to appear for the First Semester of IV Year examinations.Subsequently, by order, dated 12-03-2008, passed in W.P.M.P.No.4907 of2008, the petitioner was permitted to appear for the final examinations ofsecond Semester of IV Year B.Tech./B.E. course and the results were alsodirected to be declared by the first respondent-University. Aggrieved bythe said order, dated 12-03-2008, the second respondent-College haspreferred the present writ appeal.
8. Learned counsel for the second-respondent College vehementlycontends that there is no controversy with regard to the interim order,dated 12-11-2007, allowing the petitioner to appear for the first Semesterof IV Year B.Tech./B.E. examinations.
9. It appears that pursuant to the order, dated 12-11-2007, when acontempt case was filed by the petitioner, results of the first Semester of IVYear were declared. Subsequently, by order, dated 12-03-2008, which is now being impugned in this appeal, the petitionerwas permitted to appear for the final examinations of second Semester ofIV Year B.Tech./B.E. course and the results were also directed to bedeclared wherein he was declared as passed. The net result is that thepetitioner had passed in all the Semesters of IV Year B.Tech./B.E. course.
10. Therefore, the issues that remain for consideration are—
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.
(1) Whether the learned single Judge is justified in permitting thepetitioner to appear for the final examinations of second Semesterof IV Year B.Tech./B.E. course?petitioner to appear for the final examinations of second Semesterof IV Year B.Tech./B.E. course?
(2) Whether the cause shown by the petitioner for not securing therequired percentage of attendance is justifiable? andrequired percentage of attendance is justifiable? and
(3) Whether the first respondent-University can consider the case ofthe petitioner for relaxation of the shortage of attendance forappearing for the final examinations of second Semester of IV YearB.Tech./B.E. course, in view of the facts and circumstances of thecase.the petitioner for relaxation of the shortage of attendance forappearing for the final examinations of second Semester of IV YearB.Tech./B.E. course, in view of the facts and circumstances of thecase.
11. All the above issues are to be decided by the learned singleJudge at the time disposal of the writ petition finally.
12. Therefore, we are convinced that it is eminently a fit case todirect the first respondent-Osmania University, which is not the appellantherein, to declare the results of the petitioner. In the meanwhile, thepetitioner is at liberty to make a representation to the first respondent-University, seeking condonation of shortage of attendance, if any, toappear for all the Semesters of IV Year B.Tech./B.E. course, and on suchrepresentation being made, the first respondent-University shall considerthe same and pass appropriate orders, keeping in view the over allacademic performance of the petitioner and his brilliance in sports activity,as well, un-influenced by any of the remarks or the views expressed by thesecond respondent-College, coupled with pragmatic approach.
13. It is further made clear that the declaration of results and allfurther consequential proceedings would be subject to outcome of the writpetition.
14. Post the writ petition for final hearing on 23-01-2009.
15. With the above observations and directions, the writ appeal isdisposed of, at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________
JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA
__________________________
JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH
26-12-2008.
NOTE: Communicate operative portion with regard to declaration of results by wire at party’s cost.
(B/O)
Msr.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R. VARMAAND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH
WRIT APPEAL No.465 of 2008
26-12-2008(Msr)