Telangana High Court
WP/32240/2026 of Bhattu Sruthi Vs The State of Telangana on 24 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.32240 of 2026 (CNR No.HBHC010664452026) DATED: 24.09.2026 Between: Bhattu Sruthi D/o. Bhattu Soma & another
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.32240 of 2026
(CNR No.HBHC010664452026)
DATED: 24.09.2026
Between:
Bhattu Sruthi D/o. Bhattu Soma & another
... Petitioners
AND
The State of Telangana,
Represented by its Principal Secretary,
Medical, Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, Telangana & 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. D.Vignesh Reddy, learned counsel represents Mr. Abhinav Mahender Reddy Kandadi, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. T.Sharath, learned Standing Counsel for Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences (hereinafter referred to as ‘the University’), appears for respondent No.2.
2. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is heard finally.
3. This writ petition is filed for the following relief: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the Petitioners most respectfully pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in including the names of the Petitioners at S.No.246 and S.No.257 in the List of Ineligible Candidates dated 24-08- 2026 for Admission into MBBS/BDS under Competent Authority Quota for the academic year 2026-27 under the Verification Remarks as “NON LOCAL NOT ELIGIBLE”, despite the Petitioners’ Birth, Residence and Community Certificates declaring them as Local Candidates and the Petitioners belonging to Scheduled Tribe and being natives of the State of Telangana, and further inaction of the 2nd Respondent in not considering the Petitioners’ Email Representations dated 21-09-2026 to reconsider eligibility and permit them to participate in NEET-UG 2026-27 MBBS/BDS Counselling as Local Candidates under Competent Authority Quota scheduled for Round-3 and Final Round, as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to treat the Petitioners as Local Candidates for Admission by considering the Petitioners’ Email Representations dated 21-09-2026 and the Petitioners’ Birth, Residence and Community Certificates issued by the Telangana State Government, for eligibility and to participate in NEET-UG 2026-27 MBBS/BDS Counselling as Local Candidates under Competent Authority Quota, and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of Justice and Equity.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners appeared for NEET UG-2026. Petitioner No.1 secured Rank of 2,55,872 with Score 407 and petitioner No.2 secured Rank of 2,60,422 with Score 405. Petitioners belong to Scheduled Tribe Community and possess Birth Certificates, Residence Certificates and Community Certificates issued by the competent authority of the Government of Telangana. Pursuant to the Notification dated 04/05.08.2026, petitioners registered online, uploaded the certificates and paid the prescribed fee towards application fee. On 24.08.2026, respondent No.2 published on its official website the List of Ineligible Candidates for MBBS/BDS Admissions under Competent Authority Quota for the academic year 2026-27 and in the said list, the names of the petitioners are shown at S.Nos.246 and 257 under the Verification Remarks as “NON LOCAL NOT
ELIGIBLE”. He further submitted that the petitioners preferred e-mail representations before the University on 21.09.2026 requesting to recall the remark “NON LOCAL NOT ELIGIBLE” and they be treated as ‘Local Candidates’ belonging to Scheduled Tribe Community and permit them to participate in the remaining counselling i.e., Round-3 and Final/Mop-up Round under Competent Authority Quota.
5. Learned Standing Counsel for the University, on instructions, submits that the e-mail representations dated 21.09.2026 of the petitioners would be re-examined by the University, in accordance with law.
6. Accordingly, the instant Writ Petition is disposed of directing the University to decide the petitioners’ e-mail representations dated 21.09.2026 as per the grounds taken in them and in accordance with law, by passing reasoned orders before the next counselling. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________________ APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ
______________________________________ VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, J Date: 24.09.2026 KL