WP/18759/2026 of Mohd. Ahmed Ansari Vs The State of Telangana on 18 June 2026

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief "to r.ssue an appropriale Wnt, Order or Direction more pafticularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not returning the petlioners original study ceftificates for want of tuition fee and not coniidering the represetttation dated 15.06.2026 as illegal. arbitrary opposed to the established pflnciples of taw and in vnlatiort of Atlicles 14 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to release the original ceftificates of the petitioner fofthwth . .."

2. Heard Mr. ttlohd.lslamuddin Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vamshi Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education appearing for respondent No'1'

3. Case of the petitioner is that, at the time of admission into Diploma in Computer Science and Engineering (CSE) for the ,Yo 13/59 2a.'5 academic yearc 2023-2026 in respondent No,2-College, all his original certificates, including CBSE Ce(ificate, Transfer Certificate and Bonafide Certificates, were retained by the management of respondent No.2-College. The petitioner submits that, as per the allotment order, the fee payable was Rs.15.7801-, which was fixed by respondent No 1 Accordingly, he paid the said fee. Apart from the fee frxed by respondent No.'l , respondent No.2 collected an amount of Rs 15,000/- towards security fee, stating that the same was mandatory and would be returned on completion of the course. The petitioner further submits that, during the 2n'j and 3'd years of the course. he paid the tuition fee as fixed by respondent No.1 and was permitted to attend the examrnations. The petitioner completed the three-year Diploma course

4. The petitioner further submits that he appeared for TGECET- 2026 and was interested in attending the counselling scheduled to commence from 15 06 2026 On 12.06.2026, he approached respondent No.3 with a request to return his ortginal certificates. However, respondent No.3 informed him that he was required to pay an amount of Rs 30,000/-. The petitioner informed respondent No.3 that he had already paid the entire fee payable. However, respondent No.2 informed him that there was a direction of this lust'.€luvvadr5ndev' wa 18759 )a)6 Court to collect the said fee and refused to return the original certificates

5. Further case of the petitioner is that he made a representation dated 15.06.2026 to respondent No.3 seeking return of his original certificates, but respondent No.3 refused to acknowtedge the said representation and demanded an amount of Rs.30,000/- towards the alleged dues. Thereafter, the petitioner sent another representation through post. Hence, the present writ petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner requires his original certificates for participating in the TGECET- 2026 counselling process. Learned counsel submits that the schedule for furnishing basic information, payment of processing fee and slot booking is from 15.06.2026 to 1B 06 2026, and the certificate verification for already slofbooked candidates is scheduled from 17.06.2026 lo 19.06.2026. Learned counsel further submits that, if the original certifrcates are not returned forthwith, the petitioner would not be in a position to participate in the first phase of counselling and may not secure a college of his choice.

7. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is required to attend certificate verification on 19.06.2026. He submits that the ,p :3r 59 24.2 6 action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in withholding the original certificates submitted by the petitioner at the time of admission is illegal and arbitrary. Therefore, he seeks a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to forthwith return the petitroner's original certificates

Perused the record lt is not in dispute that the original certificates of the petitioner, referred to above were submitted before respondent No 2 at the time of admission and that the petitioner has completed his Diploma in Computer Science and Engineering (CSE) course from respondent No.2-College. The said certificates, being personal and academic credentials. are undoubtedly the property of the petitioner ln such circumstances, respondent No.2-College has no authority whatsoever to retain the said certificates, and the retention of the petitioner's original certificates by respondent Nos 2 and 3 is wholly unjustified and cannot be sustained. Even assuming that the college has any monetary claim against the petitioner withholding his original certificates cannot be adopted as a mode of enforcing such claim The proper remedy, if any is available to the college, is to proceed in accordance with law for recovery of its dues, but not to retain the petitioner's original certificates rus!.e iuwad 5r d€v' wp-.13759 2026 I For the foregoing discussion, this Writ Petition is allowed, directing respondent Nos 2 and 3 to fo(hwith return the original certificates of the petitioner to him. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// " SD/. U.SUDHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION OFFICER To, BSR

1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Technical Education' Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, State of Telangana'

2. The Secretary, Nawab Shah Alam Khan College of Engineering and Technology, New Malakpet, Hyderabad' 3, The Principal, Nawab Shah AIam Khan college of Engineering and Technology, New Malakpet, Hyderabad'

4. The Secretary, State Board of Technical Education and Training Telangana' Sanketika Vid'ya Bhavan, Masib Tank, Hyderabad'

5. One CC to SRI MOHD ISLAMUDDIN ANSARI' Advocate [OPUC]

6. Two CCs to GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION' High Court for the State of Telangana, at HYderabad [OUTI

7. Two CD Copies @ \_-. (

CC TODAY HIGH COURT DATED: 1810612026 t'

ORDER

WP.No.18759 of 2026 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS I({'.' ('i rj5 * o lu .t * .f ttc l.r! to E

L4 (- ".,9