BAJA VINAY Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that he completed Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA) in Information Technology from Lovely Professional University, recognized by University Grants Commission, Punjab, on 20.06.2019. The petitioner was intending to pursue M.B.A. course. Meanwhile, the 2nd respondent-Kakatiya University issued notification inviting applications seeking admission into M.B.A. and M.C.A. courses and the petitioner applied for the same and appeared in the written test conducted on 23.05.2019 and secured 600 rank. As per norms of the notification, the certificate verification was conducted on 08.08.2019 on the selected candidates and the option was accepted. At the time of verification of the certificates, the petitioner was denied admission into M.B.A. course on the ground that the University, in which he was pursued BBA course, is not recognized by the University Grants Commission, but the fact is otherwise. The petitioner has also shown the certificate issued by the University Grants Commission recognizing the Lovely Professional University. But, in spite of the same, the 2nd respondent refused to freeze the option exercised by the petitioner to get admission on the ground that the degree possessed by him is not equivalent to the Kakatiya University or Osmania University. It is also stated that as per the rank secured by the petitioner, he has to get the admission into M.B.A. course either in the 3rd respondent University or the 4th respondent College. But, due to the rejection of option to freeze, the petitioner is deprived of his legitimate right to get admission into M.B.A. course in the college of his choice. The petitioner has sent e-mail to the 2nd respondent on 11.08.2019 bringing the above facts. As no action has been taken, the present writ petition is filed.

(2.) This Court heard both sides, on 14.08.2019, as both standing counsel sought time for getting instructions, directed for reserving one seat. On 19.08.2019, as the 2nd respondent stated that the petitioner has not approached regarding admission, while extending the interim order, this Court observed that the petitioner can approach the 2nd respondent immediately with a representation regarding his grievance and directed the 2nd respondent to consider the same and take appropriate action. Thereafter on 27.08.2019, this Court extended the interim order for one week and posted the writ petition for orders on 28.08.2019. On 28.08.2019, this Court directed the learned Standing Counsel to communicate the copy of the representation of the petitioner to the competent authority. When the matter is listed on 03.09.2019, learned counsel for the petitioner sought time for impleading the necessary parties. On 09.09.2019, this Court, while extending the interim order, ordered personal notice to the proposed respondent No.5-Telangana State Council of Higher Education Hyderabad Department of Technical Education, in I.A.No.2 of 2019. On 18.09.2019, the said I.A.No.2 of 2019 is allowed permitting the proposed respondent to come on record as respondent No.5 and as no body entered appearance on behalf of the 5th respondent in spite of service of notice, ordered appearance of the responsible officer on behalf of the 5th respondent in person and posted the matter to 30.09.2019. On 30.09.2019, as no counter-affidavit is filed by the 2nd respondent and no appearance is made on its behalf, this Court ordered appearance of the responsible officer on behalf of the 2nd respondent to answer the issue raised before the Court and posted the matter to 14.10.2019, while extending the interim order. On 14.10.2019, at request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the matter was adjourned to 15.10.2019.

(3.) The 2nd respondent placed on the record the written instructions, dated 29.08.2019, which reads as follows: