K PADMA Vs. PRINCIPAL SIDDARTHA MEDICAL COLLEGE VIJAYAWADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The batch of these writ petitions involve common questions of law and fact and can be disposed of by a common order.

(2.) In W.P. No. 12437/87 the prayer is for the issue of a writ of mandamus declaring the circular issued by the 1st respondent dated 17-8-1987 as illegal, arbitrary and to direct the 1st respendent to issue hall tickets to the petitioners for appearing for the examination in M.B.B.S. II year course, proposed to be held by the 1st respondent-College.

(3.) The purport of the above said circular dated 17-8-1987 is to demand the 4th instalment of tuition fee and special fee, i.e., Rs. 7,935/- from the resident Indian students and 10,000 U.S. Dollars plus Rs. 435/- from the Non-resident Indian students, and all the students are directed to pay the respective tuition fee and special fee etc., by 15-9-87. W.P. Nos. 3513/87, 6511/87, 12511/88, 12908/88, 14945/87, 340/88, 8423/88, 18224/88, 16709/87, 193/67,18711/87, 19645/87,281/88, 2802/88, 5804/89, 11260/88. 6051/89, 11745/88, 16711/88, and 12572/88 are writ petitions filed challenging the demand of Rs. 7500/- towards tuition fee from resident Indian students. -W.P. 15614/88 is filed by the petitioners who are non-resident Indian students. These petitioners and two of the petitioners in W.P. 12437/87, who are also non-resident Indian Students, challenge the demand of 10,000 U.S. Dollars per annum towards tuition fee. W.P. No. 14945/87 and W.P. 14946/87 are filed questioning the demand of higher hostel charges. The batch of the writ petitions thus are based upon identical questions of law and fact with marginal variations in the type of demands that have been made by the 1st respondent-Sidhartha Medical College, Vijayawada. W.P. 12437/87 has been argued at length by Sri P.Ramachandra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners in which the collection of M),000 U.S. Dollars from two of the petitioners, who are Nonresident Indian Students, and Rs. 7,500/- from the other petitioners, who are resident Indian students, has been challenged. It would, therefore, be a correct approach to discuss the facts and figures as given in W.P. 12437/ 87 as the common facts and figures in all the writ petitions with the exception of slight variation that may be necessary to be dealt with separately.