In the judgment of the High Court of Madras, Madurai Bench in S.Muthukamatchi v. The Director of Technical Education, Anna University and others in WP

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file(l therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of wflt of Mandamus questioning the action of respondent No.3 in withholding the orrginal certificates Tenth class Marks Memo (s s c), lntermediate IV'larks l\rlemo, study certificate of Navodaya Degree college, Study certificate of class Vl to X, Study, Conduct certificate, Provisional certificate and Transfer certrficate of the petitioner in their possession, which were handed over to lhem at the time of Admission as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and subsequently direct the respondent no.3 which is affiliated to respondent no.2 to release the original certificates Tenth Class tr/arks Memo (S.S.C), lntermediate Marks Memo, Study certificate of Navodaya Degree College, Study certificate o, Class Vl to X, Study, Conduct co.t ficate, provisional certificate and Tranr;fer certificate of the petitioner. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition unde- Section 151 CPC praying that in the r rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High coLr t may be pleased to direct the responde,rt no.3 which is affiliated to responden ro.2 to release the originai certificates Tenth class IVarks [\/emo (s.s c) lntermediate Marks Memo, Study certifioate of Navodaya Degree College, Sturl,, certificate of Class Vl to X, Study, (londuct certificate, Provisional cert f cate and TranSfer certificate of the pet tioner, pending disposal of the above \\.it petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI NAGESHWAR RAO PUJARI Counsel for the Respondent No.'l: AGp FOR HIGHER EDU( tiTlON Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI PRABHAKAR MALL XARJUNA SHARMC SC FOR JNTU The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION NO.33795 OF 2024 ORDE R: Heard Sri Nageshwar Rao Pujari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education, appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Sri Prabhakar Mallikarjuna Sharn:a, learned Standing Counsel for Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, appearing on behalf of respondent No.2. 2, The petitioner aDD roached the Court seekinq prayer as underi "..to issue Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus questioning the action of respondent No.3 in withholding the original certificates Tenth Class Marks Memo (S.S.C), Intermediate N4arks It4emo, Study certificate of Navodaya Degree College, Study certificate of Class VI to X, Study, Conduct certificate, Provisional certificate and Transfer certificate of the petitioner in their possession, which were handed over to tl.em at the time of Admission as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and subsequently direct the respondent Nxo.3 which is affiliated to respondent No.2 to release the original certificates Tenth Class Marks Memo (S.S.C), Intermediate Marks lvlemo, Study certificate of Navodaya l Degree rlollege, Study certificate of Class VI Conduct certificate, pro. t " t" ce rti rica t. o *h e p e r it i o n e :'.':"J : :, :: T' ', X, Study, a- j Transfer S\..I Lrp .i-i;95 ti)21 n r n r ef h

3. Th e of rm n ma e In or of a s h h a r s ntw rt e iti s The petit,ioner joined in respondent No.3 in MBA Department for the academic year submitted dll trrs rs;ar_nt original educational on, due to th€,death of sponsor of petitioner,s h Jteti roner rn t d I coll( ce as student 2-24-2026 and Certi i(,a tes. Later r: I .r ca tio n, the petitioner discontinued It is further the his MBA course. case of the petitioner th, )t when the 'd respor c ent college the 3" respondent petitioner apprcached the principal of the 3 ro receive original educational certificates. directed the petitioner to pay Rs. l,3S,OOO/_ towarc: college fee for two yea rs. Aggrieved by the same, the petitione - approached the Court by filing the present writ petition. 4, The lea rnerj counsel dppearing on behalf of tfr ) peiitioner bring s on record Memo dated 26.12.2024 and conter !s that in compliance to ther direction of this Court dated 02 7t ,>-024, the appearing on behalf oF the petitioner. I ad taken Iea rned counsel .,, J S\, I \p I '1.79 j l0ll up personal notice to the respondent No.3 and filed proof of service oF the said notice vide Memo dated 26.12.2024 duly enclosing the original postal acknowledgment card, postal receipt and the copy of the personal notice issued on behalf of the petitioner to the 3'd respondent. However, when the matter is called todav i.e.. on 13. LO.2025. there is reoresentation on behalf of the respondent No.3. 5, Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the original certiFicates of the petitioner i.e., 10Lh CIass Marks Memo (SSC), Intermediate Marks Memo, Study certificate of Navodaya Degree College, Study Certificate of Class VI to X, Study Conduct certificate, Provisional CertiFicate and Tra nsfer Certificate of the petitioner, submitted to the respondent No.3 at the time of petitioner's admission are in the custod,/ of Respondent No.3 and in spite of repeated requests on behalf of the petitioner addressed to the respondent No.3 herein, seeking release of the original certificates, which are in the custody of the respondent No.3 herein, the respondent No.3 is not releasing the same, and the said action of the 3'd respondent is highly illegal and arbitrary. .t S\. J \p -11795 20lJ

6. PE USED TH RE D n ical i (A) The Division Bench of this Court de_ rlin with an e in W.P .No.2113 7oJ2O 9v i ole its order dated 24.O1.2O20 at oaraqraph No.29 observed as under: '29. We are not expressing any opinion on the rigl t of the 3'd respc,ndent-College to recover amounts tow,l cs the entire corlrse fee or the bond amount of Rs.3 lakhs t cm the petitioner/ her parent, but we hold that withhot: rg her original ecademic qualification cert.iFicates, is rmpre ; ble rn law. 3O, Therefore, the Writ petition is allowed; the actir I of the 3'd respondent-College in not returning the olginal ir aCemrc qualification certificates of the petitioner wl I had discontinued study of M.B.B.S. t year course in lr,. said college, i-.; declared as illegal, arbrtrary and violative : {rticle 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India; para n( 7 iii) of G.O.MS.No.114, Health, Medical and Family Wetfarr (C.1) Departm€nt, dt; 05.07.2017 rs dectared to be ultra u /-.s the powers of the State Government under the T,) lrgana Educationai Institutions (Regulation of Admissio ! and Prohrbitio.r of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 (Act 5 of 19! lr; and the 3'd re;ponCent is Forthwlth directed to return thrr I.iginal academic qualification certificates of the petitioner t(, ,tlr. No costs. " The Division Bench verv clearlv certificates ofthes tudents is imoerm issible ir law. obsert ,grd that ;rlification h a - ) \\. I \vp 11795 tol I

7. The High Court of Madras in K.Palanisamy Vs, Correspondent, Vidya Vikash Matriculation School and Others of Madurai Bench in WP (MD) 20726 ot 2019. decided on 17.LO.2OL} reported in MANU/TN/6538/21tg, held that certificates of students could not be held back by educational institutions citing f inancial dues.

8. 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 2O12 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 certiricates of her daughter. Those certificates are not rike fixed deoosit receiot on which, banks claim a n L7l h Act. Therefore. the certif icates cannot be retained at anv rate. Hence , this writ Detition is allowed directinq the fourth resoondent to return all the oriqinal Certif icates deoosited bv the petitioner forthwith. "

9. In the judgment of the High Court of Delhi in Court on its o\A,n Motion Vs. Directorate of Education & Ors. in WP (C) 6658 of 2019 & CM APPL.3O816.O of 2019, dated ll.O7.2OL9, it was held as under:- <::: 6 s\' I rrp l ir95 202,1 "8. There are methods of recovering the outstanCi rc school fees with Ihe school. Even a suit ould have b, L(:n fii?-d N .2u on the - _of the students. which has not been done so far, Ntr such suit has been lnstituted by Respondent School For th,: Iecovery n n of outstan,Jing fees.

9. In view of these fac s. this Court is of th( oornron that the School Leavin Certificates ca !.!1!!---bC withheld bv the respondents M s

11. nI Dir v<- The r of Technieal Education, Anna Universitv in W.P.(MD) NO.14-194 of 2OL2, dated 18.12.2012, the Madras Hioh Court at M1rJlurai Bench cateqoricallv held that certificates of studenl is her/his propertv, Colleoe cannot detain the said certificate 1 at anv rate. Even if the colleqe has a nv monetarv claim, the re .€ rction of the t said certificates is not the me hod trv which the-sla!-[Lcar--bc enforced. There is no lien on the certificates of the- students

12. The Madras High Court in R.Pra( eep Raj v. Commissioner, the Directorate of Technical Educa tion reported in 2O19 SCC OnLine Mad.9385, and this Court in Ka ltrri Shiva Sai Teja vs. The State of Telangana in W.P.No.2930 o' 2O22, dated 24,06.2022 and D.vaishnavi vs, State of Telangana, represented by its Prinicipal secretary Health l,ledical and Family Welfare, Hydeabad in W.P.No.21L37 ol ;1o19, dated 24,o1-.2O2O and also the High court of Andhrir Pradesh at Amaravati in Andrha Pradesh Private UnaiCed Schools Management .Association v, The State of Andhrl Pradesh in W.P.No,96O6 of 2021, dated 27.1O.2O21 directe:l the college 7 SNI wp ll?95 202 r concerned authorities to return the certificates and granted liberty to the college to claim fee by availing legal remedies in similar circumstances. 13, Referring to and relying upon the Division Bench Judgment of this Court dated 24.f,1,2020 passed in W.P. No.21137 of 2019, this Court allowed W.P. No.34185 of 2023 vide its order dated ()3.06.2024.

14. UGC auidelines, dated 23.04.2OO7, an particular, paragraph No.2 reads as under: "2. The Commission is of the view that the I nstitutions/U n iversities, 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 / fnst tution. L avrnd ce rta lc te- mark sh certifi te and other documents rn orrqina!." 7 Takin into consid ration (a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, (b) The submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned -- -' .i 8 SN. J \rp r 1795 2024 Assastant Government Pleader for High,:r' Education, appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1, (c) The observations made by the t,ivision Bench of this Court vide its order dated 24.-1.2( ilo passed in W.P. No.21137 of 2OLg (referred to and extrr,cted above), (d) The observations made by this Court vide its order dated 03.06.2024 passed in W.P. No.3,t:1.85 ot 2023, (f) The UGC guidelines dated 23.O4.11(lO7 (referred to and extracted above), The writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.3 to return the original ce rtificates i.e., loth Class Marks Memo (SSC), Intermediate lvlarks Memo, Study Certificate of Navodaya Degree College, Study Certificate of Class VI to X, Study & Condr ct Certificate, Provisional Certificate and Transfer Certlficate of the petitioner, which are in possession of the re ;pondent No.3 College, within one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 9 S\-.I $p r lr9i l(J2J Miscellaneous petitions, Petition, shall stand closed . if any, pending in this Writ (i t / To, //TRUE COPY// SD/. A.SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGIATRAR /& sEcTlON SfrrCrn

1. The Prl. Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Secretariat, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

2. The Registrar, Jawarlal Nehru Technical University, Kukatpally, Hyderabad, Telangana State, Pincode. 500 085.

3. Tte P.rincipal, Malla Reddy Engineenng College, Maisammaguda, Dhulapally (Post Via Kompally), Secunderabad-500 100 -

4. One CC to SRI NAGESHWAR RAO PIJJAR|, Advocate tOpUCl 5. One CC to SRI PRABHAKAR MALLTKARJUNA SHARMA. SC FOR JNIU loPUCl

6. Two CCs to GP FOR HIGHER EDLICATION, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

7. Two CD Copies B S HIGH COURT SNJ DATED:1311012025 CC TODAV B lii C a._ - .-../, i )- ORDER WP.No-33795 of 2024 2/ t]iT t,i :t ) l, (-) ,, -!' ': t:l;. ,.\' +, ''\t)*'.''-''-' .-.-, I ' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS