S. Shalini v. The Convener MCA Admissions :: 1999-2000, Osmania University, Hyderabad
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 02 Dec 2004
- Bench
- G ROHINI
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as in fructuous
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the Candidature of the Petitioner under Category No. II, of Sports quota for M.C.A. Course 1999-2000 by taking the Certificate issued by Sports Authority of India for participating in XIXth National Sports of Women Festival'1994 into consideration, after declaring the Rules-1 & 2 of Annexure-Iv of Rules, Regulation and Instructions of Osmania University for M.B.A. & M.C.A. Admissions,1999-2000, as illegal, arbitrary, irrational and violative of Article-14 of Constitution of India and to struck down the same in so far as Sports quota is concerned, as against the very object of reservation provided for Sports quota and consequently to direct the Respondents No.3 and No.4 to make G.O.Ms.No. 195 (Education (E.C.2) Department, Dt.26/8/1993, applicable uniformly to all the Courses of Under Graduate/Post Graduate Courses imparted in all the Universities in the State of A.P., which are re-constituted under Section (4) of A.P. Universities Act, 1991. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.SUDHAKAR REDDY & NEERAJA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: MR.K.RAMAKANTH REDDY The Court made the following :
ORDER:
Operative part
Sri B.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the cause in this writ petition does not survive and therefore, no further adjudication is necessary. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as in fructuous. No costs. __________
02.12.2004 To
The Convener MCA Admissions :: 1999-2000, Osmania University, Hyderabad.
The Registrar, Osmania University, Hyderabad.
The Secretary, Education (E.C.2) Department, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad.
The Chancellor under the A.P. University Act, 1991, Hyderabad.
2CD copies.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as in fructuous
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
A.P. University Act, 1991; Constitution of India — art. 226; A.P. Universities Act, 1991.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 02 Dec 2004. The bench was G ROHINI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.