ORDER : Heard Sri Y.V.S.S. Siva Sarma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for General Administration appearing on behalf of respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Higher Education, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3, Sri Malipeddi Srinivas Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for JNTU appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4 and Sri Sai Babu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.5. 2. The petitioners 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 declaring the action of the Respondents No.5 in withholding the Petitioners original Certificates as illegal, unjust and violation of principles of natural justice and restrain the institution/Colleges from withholding original certificate due to outstanding amounts for the Government or any including unpaid fees and regulations mentioned under Rule 2(F)(6) and Rule.4 issued by UGC notification vide file No.14- 4/2012(CPP-1) in October 2018 and Cir. No. JNTUH/DAAA/Students/Fee Reimbursement/2024, Dated 07/03/2024 an violations issued by Respondent No.4 and AITCE Circular F.No.1- 101/DPG/AITCE/Regulations/2019 vide letter dated 23.09.2019 and violation of Article. 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India, Consequently direct the Respondents to issue all the Original Certificates including Long Memo, Study Conducts, Transfer Certificate of SSC, Intermediate, all Semesters Memo, Transfer Certificate, Study Conduct, and Bonafide Certificates along Provisional and Consolidated Marks Memos of Engineering are holding with Respondent No.5 and pass”. 3. The case of the petitioners in brief as per the averments made by the petitioners in the affidavit filed by the petitioners in support of the present writ petition is as under: i) The Petitioners had studied in Respondent No. 5 College- i.e., the Guru Nanak Institutions (GNIT), H.S.Saini Ibrahimpatnam, R.R. District pursuing Engineering under the Government Fee Reimbursement Scheme. ii) Upon completion of courses, the petitioners approached the college for collection of Original Certificates including Long Memo, Study Conducts, Transfer Certificate of SSC, Intermediate, all Semesters Memo, Transfer Certificate, Study Conduct, and Bonafide Certificates along with Provisional and Consolidated Marks Memos of Engineering. However, the authorities of Respondent No. 5 college refused to release the certificates on the ground that the Government of Telangana had not yet released the pending fee reimbursement amounts. However, the authorities of Respondent No. 5 college refused to release the certificates on the ground that the Government of Telangana had not yet released the pending fee reimbursement amounts. iii) The respondent No.5-College is demanding full payment of fees from students, contrary to AICTE regulations and directions issued by the Telangana State Council of Higher Education, which clearly prohibit withholding of certificates. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. 4. PERUSED THE RECORD (A) The letter vide Lr.No.0508/ TGCHE/ Refund of Originals/2024, dated 05.08.2024 issued by the Telangana Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad addressed to the Registrars of OU, KU, TU, MGU, SU, PU, JNTU, JNAFAU & TMVV is extracted hereunder: “Sir, Sub :- TGCHE Withholding of Original Certificates of the Students – Instructions to the Universities/Colleges- Regarding. Ref :- This office Lr. No. TGCHE/Fee Reimbursement /2024, dt.23.02.2024 While referring to the subject and reference cited that in continuation of earlier letter, it has come to the notice of the Government that certain private colleges are withholding the original certificates of students on the pretext of not receiving fee reimbursement from the Government. Withholding of original certificates will have significant implications for the students, especially when they need to present these documents to join for higher education, applying or joining for jobs and other purposes. Further, in terms of UGC (Grievance Redressal of students) Regulations 2018, the colleges are barred from withholding or refusing to return any document in the form of certificates of degree, diploma or any other award or other document deposited with it by a students for the purposes of seeking admission in such institution. Therefore, I am by direction request the Universities to address/ instruct to all affiliated Private Colleges under its jurisdiction not to insist payment of Tuition Fee from the students who are eligible for fee reimbursement and not to deny issuing original certificates on the pretext of not receiving fee reimbursement from the Government. It is not a healthy practice. Such colleges may be blacklisted and shall not be considered for free reimbursement, which will also affects affiliation of such colleges. The Colleges shall be directed to follow the instructions of the Government scrupulously and failure in this regard will be viewed seriously and stringent action will be initiated against such colleges.” (B) UGC guidelines, dated 23.04.2007, in particular, paragraph No.2 reads as under: "2. The Colleges shall be directed to follow the instructions of the Government scrupulously and failure in this regard will be viewed seriously and stringent action will be initiated against such colleges.” (B) UGC guidelines, dated 23.04.2007, in particular, paragraph No.2 reads as under: "2. The Commission is of the view that the Institutions/Universities, by way of retaining the certificate in original, force retention of admitted students which limits the opportunities for the candidates from exercising other options of joining other institutions of their choice. However, it would not be permissible for institutions and Universities to retain the School/ Institution, Leaving Certificate, mark sheet, caste certificate and other documents in original." 5. A Division Bench of this Court vide its judgment, dated 24.01.2020 in W.P.No.21137 of 2019 dealing with withholding of original academic qualification certificates of the students observed at paragraph Nos. 29 and 30 as under:- “29. We are not expressing any opinion on the right of the 3rd respondent-College to recover amounts towards the entire course fee or the bond amount of Rs.3 lakhs from the petitioner / her parent, but we hold that withholding her original academic qualification certificates, is impermissible in law. 30. Therefore, the Writ Petition is allowed; the action of the 3rd respondent-College in not returning the original academic qualification certificates of the petitioner who had discontinued study of M.B.B.S. I year course in the said college, is declared as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India; Para no.7(iii) of G.O.MS.No.114, Health, Medical and Family Welfare (C.1) Department, dt.05.07.2017 is declared to be ultra vires the powers of the State Government under the Telangana Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 (Act 5 of 1983); and the 3rd respondent is forthwith directed to return the original academic qualification certificates of the petitioner to her. No costs.” The Division Bench very clearly observed that withholding the original academic qualification certificates of the students is impermissible in law. 6. The High Court of Madras in “K.Palanisamy Vs. Correspondent, Vidya Vikash Matriculation School and Others” of Madurai Bench in WP (MD) 20726 of 2019 decided on 17.10.2019 reported in MANU/TN/6538/2019, held that certificates of students could not be held back by educational institutions citing financial dues. 6. The High Court of Madras in “K.Palanisamy Vs. Correspondent, Vidya Vikash Matriculation School and Others” of Madurai Bench in WP (MD) 20726 of 2019 decided on 17.10.2019 reported in MANU/TN/6538/2019, held that certificates of students could not be held back by educational institutions citing financial dues. 7.In the judgment of the High Court of Madras, Madurai Bench in S.Muthukamatchi vs. The Director of Technical Education, Anna University and others in WP(MD) No.14394 of 2012 decided on 18.12.2012 reported in MANU/ TN/ 2168/ 2012, it is observed as under: "I would not venture to get into that controversy, namely, whether the College is entitled to collect the balance of fees or not. The main grievance of the petitioner is about the certificates of her daughter. Those certificates are not like fixed deposit receipt on which, banks claim a general lien in terms of Section 171 of the Contract Act. Therefore, the certificates cannot be retained at any rate. Hence, this writ petition is allowed directing the fourth respondent to return all the original Certificates deposited by the petitioner forthwith ." 8. In the judgment of the High Court of Delhi in Court on its own Motion Vs. Directorate of Education & Ors. in WP (C) 6658 of 2019 & CM APPL.30816.0 of 2019, dated 11.07.2019, it was held as under:- "8. There are methods of recovering the outstanding school fees with the school. Even a suit could have been filed by Respondent No.2 upon the parents of the students, which has not been done so far. No such suit has been instituted by Respondent School for the recovery of outstanding fees. 9. In view of these facts, this Court is of the opinion that the School Leaving Certificates cannot be withheld by the respondents." 9. In S.Muthukamatchi vs. The Director of Technical Education, Anna University in W.P.(MD) NO.14394 of 2012, dated 18.12.2012, the Madras High Court at Madurai Bench categorically held that certificates of student is her/ his property. College cannot detain the said certificates at any rate. Even if the college has any monetary claim, the rejection of the said certificates is not the method by which the claim can be enforced. There is no lien on the certificates of the students. 10. College cannot detain the said certificates at any rate. Even if the college has any monetary claim, the rejection of the said certificates is not the method by which the claim can be enforced. There is no lien on the certificates of the students. 10. The Madras High Court in R.Pradeep Raj v. Commissioner, the Directorate of Technical Education reported in 2019 SCC OnLine Mad.9385, and this Court in Kaluri Shiva Sai Teja vs. The State of Telangana in W.P.No.2930 of 2022, dated 24.06.2022 and D.Vaishnavi vs. State of Telangana, represented by its Prinicipal Secretary Health Medical and Family Welfare, Hydeabad in W.P.No.21137 of 2019, dated 24.01.2020 and also the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati in Andhra Pradesh Private Unaided Schools Management Association v. The State of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.9606 of 2021, dated 27.10.2021 directed the college concerned authorities to return the certificates and granted liberty to the college to claim fee by availing legal remedies in similar circumstances. 11. Based on the Division Bench Judgment of this Court dated 24.01.2020 passed in W.P.No.21137 of 2019, this Court had allowed W.P.No.34185 of 2023 vide its order dated 03.06.2024 granting identical relief as granted in W.P.No.21137 of 2019. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: 12. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners contends that the subject issue in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court, dated 08.10.2025 passed in W.P.No.25952 of 2025, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 4 do not dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. 13. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 submits that, upon due verification and after ascertaining whether the petitioners’ documents are in the possession of respondent No.5-institute, the same will be returned to the petitioners. 14. This Court opines that the 5 th respondent cannot withhold the petitioners’ original certificates such as Long Memo, Study Conducts of SSC, Intermediate, all Semesters Memo, Transfer Certificate, Study Conduct, and Bonafide Certificates along with Provisional and Consolidated Marks Memos of Engineering, under any pretext. There is no lien on the certificate of the students since the certificate of the student is his/her property. There is no lien on the certificate of the students since the certificate of the student is his/her property. This Court opines that the right of students to obtain their Certificates after completion of petitioners’ courses cannot be denied by the concerned authorities merely because the tuition fee is due and on the ground that the Government of Telangana had not yet released the pending fee reimbursement amounts. This Court opines that if any amount is due from the petitioners towards such fees, the proper course available to the respondents is to initiate appropriate proceedings against the concerned for recovery before the competent Court and coercive tactics cannot be adopted by the 5 th respondent to make the petitioners pay the tuition fee for return of their own documents. This Court opines that there is no justification on the part of the 5 th respondent in withholding the Transfer Certificates of the petitioners for non-payment of tuition fee. 15. A bare perusal of the specific instructions vide Lr.No.0508/TGCHE/Refund of Originals/2024 dated 05.08.2024 issued by the Secretary, Telangana Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad addressed to all the Registrars of Universities (referred to and extracted above) clearly indicates that specific instructions had been issued by the Government instructing all the affiliated Private Colleges within its jurisdiction not to insist on payment of tuition fee by the students who are eligible for the fee reimbursement from the State Government. Further as per the guidelines of UGC, colleges cannot withhold or refuse to return any document such as of certificates of degree, diploma or any other award or other document deposited with it by students. Therefore duly taking into consideration the view of the various High Courts on the subject issue in various Judgments, referred to and extracted above, this Court opines that petitioners are entitled for grant of relief as prayed for in the present writ petition. 16. Therefore duly taking into consideration the view of the various High Courts on the subject issue in various Judgments, referred to and extracted above, this Court opines that petitioners are entitled for grant of relief as prayed for in the present writ petition. 16. Taking into consideration : (a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, (b) The observations on the subject issue pertaining to withholding of original certificates of the students, by the Authorities concerned in the Judgments of the various High Courts (referred to and extracted above), (c) The order of this Court dated 08.10.2025 passed in W.P.No.25952 of 2025 (referred to and extracted above), (d) The UGC guidelines, dated 23.04.2007 in particular, paragraph No.2 (referred to and extracted above), (e) The specific instructions vide Lr.No.0508/ TGCHE/ Refund of Originals/ 2024 dated 05.08.2024 issued by the Secretary, Telangana Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad addressed to all the Registrars of Universities (referred to and extracted above), (f) The discussion and conclusion as arrived at paragraph Nos.12 to 15 of the said order, The Writ Petition is allowed as prayed for. The 5 th respondent is directed to issue the original academic certificates of the petitioners i.e., Long Memo, Study Conducts of SSC, Intermediate, all Semesters Memo, Transfer Certificate, Study Conduct, and Bonafide Certificates along with Provisional and Consolidated Marks Memos of Engineering to the petitioners herein by duly taking into consideration the observations in the various judgments (referred to and extracted above) and the specific instructions issued by the Secretary Telangana Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad, vide Lr.No.0508/ TGCHE/ Refund of Originals/ 2024 dated 05.08.2024 to all the Registrars of the Universities including the 4 th respondent University herein(referred to and extracted above) and also the UGC guidelines, dated 23.04.2007 (referred to and extracted above) within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. The miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.