WP/20961/2026 of Bandari Ashwini Vs The State of Telangana on 7 July 2026

:ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: "to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus. declaring that the action of the respondents, more particularly the 3d respondent in erroneously/wrongly considering the petitioner, under 'Scheduled Caste Group-1 OU Local Calegory' instead of Scheduled Caste Group_lll (NETHAKANI-22 (SC) OU Locat Category to which the petitioner belongs, in the TG ECET Admjssions 2026, during certificate verification and web counselling process, despite production of original caste certificate bearrng No. CND022635783b35, dated 16 06 2026, issued by the competent authority and the provisional allotment of seat in First phase in Civrl Engineering erroneously under Scheduled Caste-l Category, instead of Scheduled Caste_lll laJegory, ignoring the petitroners category as Scheduled Caste Category- lll as mentioned- and recorded in the TG ECET -2026 Registration Form, Hall Ticket and Rank Card as i egal, nigfrnanOeO, arbitrary, unjust, devoid of lawful reaions igainst the doctrine of legitimate expectation and unconstitutional, being violative of Articles 14 and 21

of the Constltutron of lndia, by holding that the petitioner belong to Scheduled Caste Group-lll OU [o"ri C"t"goty and consequently direct the 3'' iesoonAent,- to consider the petitioner under Scheduled Caste Group-lll OU Local category lr afiotment of seat tn TG ECET Admissions-2026 web counseffing strictly as per the options exercised b1' ine petitioier and in accordance with the petitioners irnf , tn" merit list in TG ECET Admissions-2026 and pass .."

2. Heard Mr.Gouraram Rajasekhar Reddy' learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.P Suresh Ram' learned Standing Counsel forTelanganaCouncilofHigherEducation,appearingfor respondent No.2

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief is that she completed a Diploma in Civil Engineering from Government Polytechnic College for Women, Warangal, and applied for lateral entry admission into the second year B.E /B'Tech' course through TGECET-2026' Further case of the petitioner is that she belongs to Scheduled Caste Group-lll (Nethakani-22) and secured Rank No 51 in the Civil Engineering branch and an overall rank of 803 Further case of the petitioner is that, at the time of certificate verification on '18 06 2026' though she produced a new caste certificate' dated 16 06 2026' wherein,shewasshownasbelongingtoScheduledCaste Group-lll, the respondents erroneously treated her as belonging to Scheduled Caste Group-1, by relying on her earlier caste certificate'

Consequently, she was considered under the wrong reservation category during counselling and was allotted a seat in Civil Engineering at Gokaraju Rangaraju lnstitute of Engineering and Technology, Bachupally, Hyderabad, which was her sixth preference. Further case of the petitioner is that, on noticing the error, she approached the offlce of respondent No.3 on 25.06.2026 and 29-06.2026 and submitted a representation seeking correction of her caste category. However, the respondents refused to rectify the same on the ground that the allotment process had already been completed. Further case of the petitioner is that the erroneous action of the respondents in treating her as belonging to Scheduled Caste Group-|, carrying 1% reservation, instead of Scheduled Caste Group-lll, carrying 5% reservation, deprived her of the benefit of reservation available under her correct sub-category, resulting in the allotment of a lower-preference college, while candidates lower in merit under Scheduled Caste Group-lll were allotted better colleges than her. Hence, the present writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No'3committedanerror,intreatingthepetitionerasbelongingto Scheduled Caste Group-|, instead of Scheduled Caste Group-lll' thereby, depriving her of the benefit of reservation available under her correct sub-category Learned counsel further submits that due to the said error, the petitioner was allotted her sixth preferred college i.e., Civil Engineering at Gokaraju Rangaraju lnstitute of Technology (Autonomous), Bachupally' Hyderabad and she has also paid the requisite fee for confirmation of the allotted seat' Learned counsel further submits that candidates lower in merit under the Scheduled Caste Group-lll category secured better allotments than the petitioner and that the said error would adversely affect the petitionef s future career prospects Therefore' learned counsel prays this Court to direct respondent No 3 to rectify the said error and consider the petitioner under the Scheduled Caste Group-lll category for the purpose of allotment of a seat in the TGECET Admission,2026'

5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No 2' on instructions, submits that an old caste certificate issued prior to 2025 was uploaded by lhe'petitioner for web counselling' wherein'

her caste was shown as Scheduled Caste, but no sub_category was mentioned. Thereafler, at the time of certificate verification conducted on 'l 8.06.2026, she has produced a new caste certificate, dated 16.06.2026, wherein, her caste was mentioned as Schedule Caste Group-lll. As such, inadvertenfly, the respondents have considered the petitioner's Scheduled Caste sub_category as Group-|, instead of Group-lll, during the allotment process. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the allotment process has already been completed and the petitioner was allotted her sixth preferred college, i.e., Civil Engineering at Gokaraju Rangaraju lnstitute of Technology (Autonomous), Bachupally, Hyderabad and she has also paid the requisite fee for confirmation of the alrotted seat.

6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both parties and upon perusal of the material on record, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner produced a new caste certificate, dated 16.06.2026 at the time of certificate verification conducted on 18.06.2026, wherein, she was shown as belonging to Scheduled Caste Group-lll. lt is also not in dispute that the candidature of the petitioner was inadvertenily considered underscheduledCasteGroup-l,insteadofGroup.lll,duringthe allotment process. On account of such incorrect consideration of her sub-category, the petitioner was allotted a seat in her sixth preferred college. However, if her candidature is considered under the correct Scheduled Caste sub-category' she would be allotted a seat in a better college in accordance with her merit' reservation benefits and the options exercised by her during the web counselling Process

7. ln view of the above discussion' this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent No'3 to reconsider the candidature of the petitioner in accordance with the options exercised by her during the web counselling process and allot a seat as per her eligibility' taking into consideration her correct Scheduled Caste sub- category, strictly in accordance with law No costs Pending miscellaneous applications' if any' shall stand closed Sd,.C.DEEPIKA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION OFFICER Higher Education, OPP Mahavir //TRUE COPY//

The Principal Secretary to Government' Education Department' ?l . B R: Ambedkar Telangana staie-sectetariai' Saifabad' Hyderabad' State of Telangana The Secretary' Telangana Council of Hoipital Masab Tank, Hyderabad-500 028

J To, The convenor' TG ECET-2026 Admissions' Masab Tank, Hyderabad-soo 028 Sankethika VidYa Bhavan'

4. One CC to SRt GOURARAM RAJASHEKAR REDDY, Advocate IOPUCI

5. One CC to SRt A p. SURESH RAM, SC FOR TCHE tOpUCl

6. Two CCs to Gp FOR EDUCATION, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

7. Two CD Copies o

HIGH COURT CC TODAY DATED: 07t07t2026

ORDER

WP.No.20961 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS e I TA J re c Y q ao ,1: \.. ,1,. '\.I U J

(') t .a- 2U6 (i t \:---- --. \: qb ,l> t