Vasa Hemanth, S/o v. Veerabhadra Rao, Aged about

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent not issuing the petitioner's Original Certificates in spite of a requests by the petitioners is contemptuous, unjust, illegal, arbitrary, against the orders of this Hon'ble Court in and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and f consequently, direct the 2nd Respondent to return the petitioner's all original certificates such as Memorandum of Marks of lntermediate, SSC, Study Certificates, caste Certificates etc., immediately to avoid missing the Higher education opportunities lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petiticn under Section '1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2n( Respondent to return the petitioner's all original ce(ificates such as Memorandurr of Marks of lntermediate, SSC, Study Certificates, caste Certificates, etc., immediately to avoid missing the the Higher education opportunities Pending disposal of the Main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. MANDRU SAMBASIVA RAO Counsel for lhe Respondent Nos. 1,3&4: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Ms. M. SAI PRIYA REP SRI P. PANDU RANGA REDDY, SC The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA ORDER: Heard sri M. sambasiva Rao, Iearned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 and Miss M.sai Priya, learned counsel representing Sri P. Pandu Ranga Reddy, learned standing counsel on record appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.

2. prayer as under: t....to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent not issuing the petitioners original certificates in spite of a requests by the petitioners in contemptuous, unjust, illegal, arbitiary, against the orders of this Hon'ble Court in and violafive of Article L4 and 2t of the constitution of India and consequently, direct the 2nd respondent to return the petitioners all original certificates such as Memorandum of Marks of Intermediate, SSC, Study Certificates, Caste certificates etc., immediately to avoid missing the Higher Education opportunities and to pass order""'

3. The case of the petitioners in brief is that the petitioners got admission in convener quota in the 2nd respondent college in : I 'I i : ! I I T I I I I II 2 SN, J wP 32480 2025 the ye:ar 2021 and joined CSE B.Tech by giving all necessary origine,l documents. The petitioners belong to SC and ST community. The government of Telangana is providing fee reimbu rsement scheme for the above categories. Upon completion of courses, the petitioners approached the 2nd respon'Jent for their original certificates, but the 2nd respondent refusec and rejected to issue the original certificates of the petitioners. It is further the case of the petitioners that the petitioners submitted written representation to the 2nd respondent authorities to get back their original certificates, but the respondent authorities informed that the petitioners have to pay all the due amount and then only they will return all their certificat:es. The petitioners approached the Telangana State Human llights Commission and submitted their representation on

12.09.2Ct25 and requested to direct the 2nd respondent for return of their original certificates and the Telangana State Human Rights Commission has directed the 2nd respondent to return the petitioner's original certificates dated 16.09.2025. Despite the same thr: respondent authorities did not release the original certificates of the petitioners. Aggrieved by the action of the responderrts, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. 3 :t TI 4 SN, J wP 32480 2025 (A) The letter I r-No-O5OB /TGCHE/ 3 24 "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 pravate colleoes are withholdino Withholding of original certaficates will have significant implications for the students, especially when they need to present these documents to join for higher education, applying or joining for jo 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 Unaversities 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 origina! certificates on the pretext of not receiving fee reimbursement from the Government. It is not a healthy 4 SN, J wP 12480 2025 practice. Such colleges may be blacklisted and shalt not be considered for free reimbursement, which wilt also affects affiliation of such colleges. The Colleges shall be directed to follow the instructions of ttre Government scrupulously and failure in this regard will be viewed seriously and stringent action will be initiated against such colleges." (B) N "2. The Commission is of the view that the In stitutions/Universities, by way of retaining the certificate in or ginal, 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

5. Th,e Division Bench of this Court in its Judgment dated

24.0L.2020 passed in W.P, No.21137 of 2019 in D.Vaashnavi vs. State of Telangana had struck down paragraph No.7 (iii) of G.O.Ms.l\o.114, dated 05.07.2017 i;€., original certificates submitted by the petitioner/candidate shall not to be returned to them, till they complete their course of study and appear for the Univt:rsity examination holding it as un-constitutional. A similar viow was taken by this Court in Mahatma Gandhi Law College, NTR Nagar, Hyderabad v. State of Telangana vrde Judgment dated 09.12.2022 passed in W.p.No.224L7 of 20t8. A Similar viow was also taken vrde Judgment of this Court dated 5 SN, J wP_32480_2025 2g.t0.2024 passed in W.P.No.25559 of 2024 in Lakshmi Saranya v. The State of Telangana. 6 da d 24.O 7I.n tn W.P.No .21,137 20L9 dealino with u nder:- "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 withholdino her

30. Therefore, the Writ Petition is allowed; the action of the 3rd respondent-Coilege 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 3OO-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. " 6 SN, J wP _32480]025 r R

7. The Hioh Court Mad as tn "K.Pala lsamv Vs. m of Madurai Bench inWPt D) 207 26 of o19 I

11.O 7.2(J19. it was h ld as un er:- "8. There are method fees with the school. s of recovering the outstandi ng school has been instituted by Respondent School for of outstanding fees. 9. No such suit the recovery

9. 7 SN, J wP 32480 2025 -it i-tl certaficates at anv rate. Even if the co leoe has anv

10. The Madras High Court in R.Pradeep Commissioner, the Directorate of Technical Raj v 'l reported in 2019 SCC Online Mad.9385, and this Gourt in Kaluri Shiva Sai Teja vs. The State of Telangana in W.P.No.293O of 2022, dated 24.O6.2022 and D.Vaishnavi vs. State of Telangana, represented by its Prinicipal Secretary Health Med ical and Family Welfare, Hydeabad in W.P.No.21137 of 2O19, dated 24.OA.2O2O and also the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati in Andrha Pradesh Private Unaided Schools Management Association v. The state of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.96OG of 2o2tl dated 27.LO.2O21 directed the college concerned authorities to return the certificates and granted liberty to 8 SN, J wP _32480.2025 the <:ollege to ctaim fee by availing legat remedies in similar circumstances.

11. tBased on the Division Bench Judgment of this Court dated 24.O1.202O passed in W.p.No.21-1,g7 of 2019, this Court had allowed W.p.No.34185 of 2023 vide its order dated O3.O5.2024 granting identical relief as granted in W.P.No.21137 ot 2OL9. L2. This Court opines that UGC by its guidelines (referred to and extracted above) had directed the Universities, to which the l colleges; like the 3'd respondent are affiriated, to initiate action when such instances are brought to their notice and in spite of the aforesaid guidelines issued by the UGC, no action is being taken, and on the other hand, students, like the petitioner, are forced t. approach this court seeking return of originars and onry after or<lers are passed by this Court, the originals are being returned to the students, notwithstanding the fact that the colleges like the respondent No.3, have any claim towards fee, the said institutions are required to initiate proceedings for recovery of fee dues and cannot resort to withholding of certificat€'s of the students in vioration of the uGC guidelines. 9 SN, J wP 12480 2025

13. Learned counset appearing on behalf petitioners mainly contends that the subject issue in the present writ petition squarely covered by the order dated O9.L2.2O22 passed in W.P.No.224L7 ol 2O18 and also the order dated 27.LO.2O25 passed in W.P.No.324o4 ot 2025. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent does not dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. o

14. This Court opines that the 2nd respondent cannot withhold the petitioners' original certificates such as SSC, Intermediate and Caste Certificates etc., under any pretext. 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 from one institution to join another institution cannot be denied by the concerned authorities merely because the tuition fee is due and 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 petitioners for recovery before the competent Court and coercive l0 SN, J w? 32480 2025 tactics cannot be adopted by the 2nd respondent to make the petitioners pay the tuition fee. This Court opines that there is no justific.ation on the part of the 2nd respondent in withholding the original Certificates of the petitioners for non-payment of tuition fee.

15. A bare perusal of the record indicates that specific instructions vide Lr.No.050B/TGCHE/Refund of Originals/2024 dated 05.08.2024 had been issued by the Secretary, Telangana Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad to all the Registrars of Universities (referred to and extracted above) instructing all the affiliatecl Private Colleges within its jurisdiction not to insist on paymeni: 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 for the purpose of seeking admission in such institution. Thereforer duly taking into consideration the view of the various High Couts on the subject issue in various Judgments, referred to and e)(tracted above, this Court opines that petitioners are entitled f,rr grant of relief as prayed for in the present writ petition. r SN, J wP 32480 2025 (a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the

16. case, (b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learn counsel appearing on behalf of the resPondents, (c) The specific instructions vide Lr.No.OSO8/ TGCHE/Refund of Originalsl2O24 dated O5.08.2O24 issued by the Secretary, Telangana Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad addressed to all the Registrars of Universities (referred to and extracted above), (d) The observations on the subject issue ining 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), (e) The UGC guidelines, dated 23.O4.2OO7, The Writ Petition is allowed as prayed for. The 2nd respondent is directed to issue the original academic certificates of the petitioners i.e., SSC, Marks Intermediate, Study Certificates, Caste Certificates etc., to the petitioners herein by duly taking into consideration t2 SN. J wI_12480 2025 .L the observations in the various judgments (referred to and e:<tracted above) and the specific instructions issued by the Secretary Telangana Councit of Higher Education, Hyderabad, vide Lr.No.O5O8/ TGCHE/Refund of Originals/2o24 dated OS.08.2O24 to all the Registrars of the Unriversities including the 4th 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 shalt be order as to cost. Th,e miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. To, SD/- C.DEEPIKA ASSISTANT REGI //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER Hvderab,ad - 500 028 Reddy tlist - 501 301 RmUeOt artelangana S6cretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana 500 002

1. The Principal Secretary to Govt, Higher Education Department, Dr B R 2. The Dirt:ctor and correspondent, Annamacharya lnstitute ot- lecnnologi ano - Slience (nrtonomous) Piglipur Batasingaram Hayathnagar Manadal, Ranga a. ine $ei,ieiary, Telangana State Council of Higher Education Mahavir Marg, 4. Ti;-d;hissioner of Technical Education, Telangana State, Nampally, 5. Ohe CC to SRl. MANDRU SAMBASIVA RAO, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION,High Court for the State ot 7. one ic to sRt.' P. PANDU RANGA REDDY, sc [oPUc] 8. Two CD Copies Telanoara at Hvderabad [OUTI Hvderabad - 500 028 BM TKS HIGH COURT DATED:2711112025 I ( o c) HE{ s 6 ttB 2028 * ) .. .(.-; ;l r,-.,. - '- ::.-.".- ORDER WP.No.32480 of 2025 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \ \ b\^