OSMANIA UNIVERSITY HYDERABAD Vs. ARVINDA MAHA VIDYALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment dated 3-9-2001 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.9072 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the learned Judge has disposed of the writ petition directing: Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent-University to permit the students to appear for 1st year examination and declare their results, if not already done. If the candidates have passed the 1st year examination, they shall be allowed to undergo 2nd year course in accordance with rules. However, this order is passed keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and it shall not be quoted as precedent in any other subsequent case. No costs.

(2.) The respondent-College filed the aforementioned writ petition claiming inter alia the following reliefs: ....to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not issuing Hall Tickets to the 7 students studying 1st year B.C.A. in the petitioner's college as illegal, arbitrary, capricious, violative of Article 14 and consequently compelling the respondents to permit the students viz., 1. N. Satish Kumar, 2. V,U. Reddy, 3. V.H. Babu, 4. Abdul Altaf, 5. Fasih Ahmed Jaleel, 6. M. Vinod Kumar, 7. K;Praveen to appear for the examination scheduled on 2nd, 4th, 6th of May and the 2 practical examinations to be conducted of 1st year, B.C.A. for the academic year 2000-2001 and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(3.) The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. The Osmania University has not recognised the Bachelor of Computer Application (B.C.A.) Course run by the writ petitioner-College. Despite the same, the students for the academic year 2000-2001 were admitted into the said course. The College, however, filed a writ petition marked as WP No. 16075 of 2000 seeking a direction upon the respondents to put it on the counselling list of the State. Allegedly, in the said writ petition the Court directed the University to allow the College for conducting the counselling for the 1st year B.C.A. Course. However, it is stated that as regards the College no counselling was done, but however, it, pending approval by the appropriate authority, admitted seven students. It is accepted at the Bar that some deficiencies have been noticed in November, 2000 by the Osmania University in the list of candidates approved by the Convener, B.C.A.CET and no doubt neither a letter from the academic head nor a certificate from the audit authority had been produced before this Court.