Telangana High Court
WP/32937/2026 of Shriyanshu Prashant Rane Vs The State of Telangana on 30 September 2026
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 32937 of 2026 (CNR No.HBHC010675022026) DATED : 30.09.2026 Between: Shriyanshu Prashant Rane … Petitioner
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No. 32937 of 2026
(CNR No.HBHC010675022026)
DATED : 30.09.2026
Between:
Shriyanshu Prashant Rane
… Petitioner
AND
The State of Telangana and another
… Respondents
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:
Mr. Abdul Kabeer, learned counsel appears for petitioner.
Mr. R. Nagarjuna Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Medical, Health and Family Welfare Department appears for respondent No.1.
Mr. T. Sharath, learned Standing Counsel for Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences appears for respondent No.2.
2. The instant Writ Petition has been preferred with the following prayer: “…..pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly the 2nd respondent in not considering the petitioner for counselling and admission into MBBS/BDS course under Management Quota “C” NRI Quota seat in ongoing phase or next phase of counselling for the academic year 2026-27 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to consider and include the name of the petitioner for admission into MBBS/BDS course HCJ (AKrS, J) & VRKR, J W.P.No.32937 of 2026
under Management Quota “C” NRI Quota Seat for the academic year 2026-
27. ”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has got registered for admission into MBBS/BDS Course for the academic year 2026-27 under Management Quota – “C” category but could not get NRI documents from his relative who is sponsoring him under NRI category. Upon receipt of NRI documents subsequent to the release of final merit list, the petitioner approached the respondent University to upload such documents which were refused by the respondent University. He submits that the petitioner preferred a representation through email to the respondent University on 27.09.2026 to permit him to upload such NRI documents, but the same has not yet been considered. He further submits that the respondent University be directed to decide the said representation in a time bound manner.
4. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent University submits that the petitioner’s representation shall be dealt with by the respondent University in accordance with law.
5. Accordingly, the instant Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent University to decide the petitioner’s representation dated 27.09.2026 as per the grounds taken in it, in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned order before the next counselling. It is made clear HCJ (AKrS, J) & VRKR, J W.P.No.32937 of 2026
that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. ____________________________ APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ
________________________________ VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, J 30th SEPTEMBER 2026
kvni