Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1381 (TS)

A. Bharath Chandra Reddy v. State of Telangana

2025-11-04

SUREPALLI NANDA

body2025
ORDER : Surepalli Nanda, J. Heard Smt. L. Pranathi Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Education, appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Sri Veda Vikas Mudiraj Uppari, learned Standing Counsel for Professor Jayashankar Telangana Agricultural University (PJTSAU), appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4. 2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under: “…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus a) Declaring the action of the Respondent No.4 in refusing to promote the Petitioner to the 3 rd year of B.Sc. (Hons.) by issuing Memo No.010/Age, Palem/Acad./2025 dated 03- 09-2025, despite his medical condition as being bad, arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 21-A of the Constitution of India and in violation of the Rules & Bye laws of the University and set aside the same and b) Consequentially direct the Respondents to permit the Petitioner to pursue his academic career in the stream of B.Sc. (Hons.) Agriculture by granting special relaxation under Regulation 7.2(b) or Regulation 18.0 of the Regulations Governing Undergraduate Programs of the University by duly taking into consideration his medical condition and c) Pass any such other order orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper”. 3. The case of the petitioner in brief, is that the petitioner was admitted to B.Sc (Hons.) Agriculture Programme at Professor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University (PJTSAU), Rajendranagar for the Academic Year 2020-21. Thereafter the petitioner suffered from neurological disorder (focal epilepsy/seizures) with repeated attacks and continuing clinical follow-ups. The health condition of the petitioner had worsened severely during Covid-19 pandemic years 2020-2022, consequently, the petitioner could not clear off all 1 st year and 2 nd backlogs as on September, 2025. The respondent No.4 issued Memo No.010/Agc., Palem/Acad./2025, dated 03.09.2025 refusing the petitioner to promote to the 3 rd year of B.Sc. (Hons) without considering the representations and medical evidence of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition. 4. The respondent No.4 issued Memo No.010/Agc., Palem/Acad./2025, dated 03.09.2025 refusing the petitioner to promote to the 3 rd year of B.Sc. (Hons) without considering the representations and medical evidence of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition. 4. It is the specific case of the petitioner that petitioner is a student suffering from neurological disorder (commonly referred to as seizures or ‘fits’/scissors), which has had a considerable impact on petitioner’s academic life and personal well being and during the pandemic, the health of the petitioner was seriously affected due to isolation, stress and limited medical access and therefore, the petitioner’s academic performance and examination readiness were extensively disrupted. Later on the petitioner made several representations requesting the 2 nd respondent herein to promote the petitioner to 3 rd year of B.Sc. (Hons) and to allow the petitioner to write blocklogs and further permit the petitioner to continue the academic classes. Regulation 7.2 (b) and Regulation 18.0 of the Regulations Governing Undergraduate Programs of the University provides for the same. In spite of the said representations, the respondents had not considered the request of the petitioner to pursue the petitioner academic career in the stream of B.Sc. (Hons) Agriculture. 5. The learned Standing Counsel for Professor Jayashankar Telangana Agricultural University (PJTSAU), appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4 submits that the representations of the petitioner had not been received by the respondents as on date and upon the petitioner making a fresh representation putting forth the grievance of the petitioner as put forth in the present writ petition with all the legal pleas as are available to the petitioner, the same would be considered by the respondent Nos.2 to 4 in accordance to law, within a reasonable period. PERUSED THE RECORD 6. Regulation 5.0, Regulation 7.2 (b), Regulation 10.1 and Regulation 18.0 of the Regulations Governing Undergraduate Programmes of the University (PJTSAU), are extracted hereunder 5.0 Advisory System The students on their admission shall be divided into convenient batches by the Associate Dean of the college and each batch is assigned to one of the teachers who are designated as ‘Advisor’. Each student immediately after enrolment fills up all the registration cards with the guidance of his/her advisor. Among other things, the advisor shall help the students in planning the programmes of their studies. Each student immediately after enrolment fills up all the registration cards with the guidance of his/her advisor. Among other things, the advisor shall help the students in planning the programmes of their studies. The advisor will establish and foster close personal relationship with students assigned to him/her during their entire stay in the college by having periodical meetings either with the entire batch of students or with each individual student as often as is considered necessary in an effort to know their problems, review their study programmes and take such remedial actions as may be necessary in consultation with the teachers concerned and the Associate Dean. The advisor will maintain a record containing particulars of previous history of the student, courses registered and examinations appeared and grades obtained in each course in each semester as per the format prescribed by the University (Annexure - 1). 7.2 (b) A student who wishes to seek relaxation of provision in clause (a) of this regulation for good and exceptional reasons may make an application within 7 (seven) calendar days from the last day of instruction of first semester to the Associate Dean of the college concerned giving the grounds and the proof thereof due to which he/ she could not fulfill the minimum 3 attendance requirement, provided he/she puts in at least 60% attendance during the first semester of admission. Such application shall be considered by a committee consisting of Associate Dean, a senior Professor or a senior Associate Professor in the colleges where a Professor is not existing, as nominated by the Associate Dean, the OIAM of the college, Advisor of the student concerned and the University Medical Officer. If the committee is satisfied that there were exceptional circumstances warranting exercise of discretion to relax the provision in clause (a) of this regulation, the Associate Dean may pass an order allowing the student to continue the studies in relaxation of the provision in clause (a). The student so permitted to continue the studies shall re-register the courses, in which he/she had shortage of attendance, when offered next. 10.1 The student shall satisfy minimum residential requirements and maximum duration as below. The minimum residential requirement is eight Semesters for U.G. Degree Programmes in the University. The maximum duration of degree programmes is fourteen semesters (7 academic years). 10.1 The student shall satisfy minimum residential requirements and maximum duration as below. The minimum residential requirement is eight Semesters for U.G. Degree Programmes in the University. The maximum duration of degree programmes is fourteen semesters (7 academic years). 18.0 No Regulation made by the Academic Council, governing the under graduate courses of study shall be constructed to limit or abridge the powers of the Academic Council to deal with any case or cases of any student or students of the under graduate courses in such manner as it may appear to it to be just and equitable. 7. A bare perusal of the relevant Regulations Governing Undergraduate Programmes of the University, Regulation 5.0 indicates that the University is statutorily obliged to provide effective advisory and remedial guidance for students facing exceptional or chronic issues. Regulation 7.2 (b) indicates that relaxation of attendance and course-registration norms for students with exceptional reasons is provided for and Regulation 10.1 permits upto 14 Semesters (7 years) to complete the degree. Regulation 18.0 empowers the Academic Council to make any relaxation “as it may appear to it to be just and equitable” in deserving cases. This Court opines that the request of the petitioner needs to be considered as per the above Regulations. 8. Taking into consideration : (a) The aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, (b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Professor Jayashankar Telangana Agricultural University (PJTSAU), appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4, (c) The contents of the impugned Memo of the Respondent No.4 dated 03.09.2025 issued to the petitioner, (d) The contents of the representations of the petitioner addressed to the respondent Nos.2 to 4 which had not been received by the respondents, according to the respondents. (e) Regulation 5.0, Regulation 7.2 (b), Regulation 10.1 and Regulation 18.0 Regulations Governing Undergraduate Programmes of the University (PJTSAU), UG Regulations, The writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to make a representation to the respondent Nos.2 to 4 putting forth the grievance of the petitioner as put forth by the petitioner in the present writ petition pertaining to the request of the petitioner to promote the petitioner to the 3 rd year of B.Sc (Hons.) and further consider the request of the petitioner to appear in backlog subjects for 1 st year and 2 nd year as per Regulation 5.0, Regulation 7.2 (b), Regulation 10.1, Regulation 18.0 of Regulations Governing Undergraduate Programmes of the University without reference to the impugned Memo No.010/ Age, Palem/ Acad./ 2025, dated 03.09.2025 issued to the petitioner, within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of representation of the petitioner and upon the 2 nd respondent receiving the said representation, the 2 nd respondent is directed to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put forth vide the said petitioner’s representation duly applying and taking into consideration the Regulation 5.0, Regulation 7.2(b), Regulation 10.1 and Regulation 18.0 of the Regulations Governing Undergraduate Programmes of the University and pass appropriate orders on the said representation of the petitioner within one (1) week thereafter and duly communicate the decision to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.