K.Palanisamv v. Corresoondent, Vidva Vikash Matriculation School and

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: AGP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI MALIPEDDI SRINIVAS REDDY, SC FOR OU Counsel for the Respondent No.4 & 5: SRI K.P.VIJAY KUMAR The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.33OO3 OF 2025 ORDER: Heard Smt. Durga Bhavani, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri Malipeddi Srinivas Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Osmania University appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 and Sri K.P. Vijay Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.4 and 5. 2, The oetitioner aoproached this Court seekino the praver as under: ",..to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus. declaring the action of Respondent Nos.4 and 5, in not returning petitioner's original educational certificates (Transfer certificate, S.S.C., and Intermediate certificates) as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unfair, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently to direct the Respondents to return the original certificates oF the petitioner without insisting upon any further payment of fee, and pass such other or further order..."

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner was admitted in the B.A., LL,B. (Five-Year Integrated Course) at the 4th respondent-college in the academic year 2015-16, 2 SN, J wP 33001 2025 during which the petitioner deposited the origiral educational certificates-Tra n sfe r Certificate, S.S.C., and Intermediate certificates-at the time of admission. Due to the unfortunate demise of the petitioner's father and the consequent financial difficulties, the petitioner was compelled to discontinue studies after the 2nd semester. Despite several orai and written representations, including a legal notice dated 25.09.2025 which was issued to the Respondent Nos.4 and 5, the college authorities have failed to return the petitioner's original certificaLes, which are essential for seeking employment and pursu ing the petitioner's career. It is further the case of the petitioner that in accordance to the UGC (Grievance Redressal of Students) Regulations, 2018, and the AICTE Notification of 2018, institutions are prohibited From retaining original certificates under any circumstances. The Telangana Council of Higher Education has also issued Circular No.0508/TGCHE/Refund of Originals/2l24, dated 05.08.2024, directing all colleges to return original certificates immediately on demand. Despite these binding directions and a recent order of this Court in W.P. N0.32404 of 2025 dated 27.10.2025 against the same institution, the respondent no.4 had continued to J SN, J wP 11003 2025 withhold the petitioner's certificates. Aggrieved by the said action, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD (A) The letter Lr.No.05O8/TGCHE / Refund of Oriqinalsl2024, dated 05.O8.2024 issued bv the Telanqana Council of Hiqher Education, Hvderabad addressed to the Reoistrars 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- Regardin g. 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 colleoes are withholdino the orioinal certificates of students on the pretext of not receivino 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 pu rposes. 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 direct3on request the Universities to address/ instruct to all affaliated Private 4 SN, J \w 13003 2025 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. "

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner brings to the notice of this Court that the subject issue in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court dated 27.10.2025 passed in W.P.No.324O4 ot 2O25 hence, the present writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid ord er.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents on record does not dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 7 nch of his u m n dated 24.01.2O2O in W.P.No.21137 of 2O19 Slealinq with withholdinq of orioinal academic oualification certificates I 5 SN, J lvP 31003 2025 of the students observed at DaraqraDh Nos. 29 and 30 as under:- "29. We are not expressing any opinion on the;-ight of the 3rd respon dent-College to recovcr amounts towards the entire course fee cr the bond amount of Rs.3 lakhs frorn the petitior.er / her parent, but we hold tha withholdinq her orioinal academic__j ualification certificates, is I mofr mtss ible in law'. r

30. Therefore, the Writ Petition is aliowed; the action of the 3rd responCent-Co llege in not returning the original acadenric 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.C.t4S.No.114, Health. Medi:al and Family Welfare (C.1) Dapartment, clt.O5.07.2OL7 is declared: to be ultra vires the' , powers of the State , Government under the Telangana Educational Institutio|ls (ReEUlation of Admissions and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 (Act 5 of 1983); and the 3rd respondent is forthwith directed to return the original acadcmic quaiification certificates of the petitioner to her. No costs. " The Division Bench verv cleajlv observed that withholdino the oriainal academic qualification certif i ca tes of t h e st u de n ts iS_'J0peInUEEjElCj!_! a w.

8. The Hiqh Court of Madrers in "K.Palanisamv Vs. Corresoondent, Vidva Vikash Matriculation School and 6 SN, J wP 31003 2025 Others" of Madurai Bench in WP (MD) 20726 of 2Ot9 decided on 17.1O.2019 reported in MANU/TN 1653A/2OL9, held that c:ertificates of st udents could not be held back bv educational institutions citino financial dues. In the iudoment of the Hiqh Cour! of Madras, 9. Madurai Bench in S,Muthuka matchi vs. The Director of Technical Education, Anna University and othets in wP(MD) l{o.14394 of 2OL2 decided on 1A.12.2OL2 reported in MANU/TN/276A/2OL2, it is observed as under: "l 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 I lien in terms of Section which. banks claim a oene L7l of the Contract Act. Therefore, the certificates cannot be retained at anv rate. Hence, _!nfC_lqi! petition is allowed directino the fourth res o s!]_dc_0!-!a return all the oriqinal Certificates deposited bv the petitioner forthwith 1O. In the iudgment of the Hioh Court of Delhi in Court on its own Motion Vs. Directorate of Education & Ors. in WP (C) 6658 of 2O19 & CM APPL.3O816.O of 2O19, dated

11.O7.2O19, it was held as under:- "8. Ther€ are methods of recovering the outstanding school fees with the school. Even a suit could have been filed bv Resoondent No,2 upon the oarents of the students, which has not been done so far, Nc s;Jch suit 7 SN, J wP 33003 2025 has been instituted by Respondent School for the recovery of outstanding fees. 9. In view of these facts, this Court is of the ooinion that the School Leavino Certificates cannot be withheld bv the resoondents."

11. In S.Muthukamatch vs. The Director of Technical Education, Anna Universitv in W.P.(MD) NO.14394 of ! 2012, dated 18.12.2012. the Madras Hiqh Court at Madurai Bench eatesorlcally ie!d that certificates of student is her/his orooertv. Colleqe cannot detain the said certificates at anv rate. Even if the colleoe has anv monetary claim, the reiection of the said certificates is not rm can enf rce . Ther no lien on the certificates of the students. L2. The Madras High Court in R.Pradeep Raj Commissioner, the Directorate of Technical Education reported in 2O19 SCC OnLine Mad.9385, and this Court in Kaluri Shiva Sai Teja vs. The State of Telangana in W.P.No.293O ot 2022, dated 24.O6.2O22 and D.Vaishnavi vs. State of Telangana, represented by its Prinicipal Secretary Health Medical and Family Welfare, Hydeabad in W.P.No.21137 of 2OL9, dated 24.O1.2O2O and also the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati in Andrha 8 SN, J wP ll00l 2025 Pradesh Private Unaided Schools Manageme,rt Association v. The State of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.9606 of 2021, dated 27.LO.2O2! directed the college concerned authorities to return the certificates and granted liberty to the college.to claim fee by availing legal remedies in si milar cir<:umstances.

13. 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 ot 2023 vide its order dated O3.O6.2024 granting identical relief as granted in W.P.No.211.37 of 2OL9. t4. UGC quidelines, dated 23.O4.2OO7, in particular, paraqraoh llo.2 reads as under: "2. The Commission is of the view that the Institutions/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 / I n stitut on, Leavino ertificate, marli sheet, caste certific ate and other documents in orioinal. "

15. Takinq into consideration: (a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the ca se/ t sN. I \w t3003 2025 (b) The submissiorro nradc by thc learned counsel appearing on behalf of thc petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the rcspondents, (c) The contents of letter vide Lr.No.O5OB/TGCHE/Refund of Originals/2O?4, dated O5.O8.2O24 issued by the Telangana Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad addressed to the Registrars of OU, KU, TU, MGU, SU, PU, JNTU, TNAFAU &. TMVV (referred to and extracted above) (d) The contents of tlre representation of the petitioner dated 20.09.2025 addressed to the sth respondent herein (e) The contents of the legal notice dated

25.09.2025 issued to the 5th respondent herein on behalf of the petitioner and (f) The view of this Court in its Judgment dated

27.1O.2025 passed in W.P.l{o.32404 ot 2025 relying on the Division Bench Judgment of this Court dated

24.OL.2O2O in W.P.No.2tL37 of 2O19 which had attained its finality, The Writ Petition is atlowed as prayed for. The 5th respondent is directed to return the petitioner's original I t l0 SN, J wP 33003 2025 certificates i.e., Transfer Certificate, SSC and Intermediate Certificates forthwith to the petitioner duly taking into consideration the observations in the various judgments (referred to and extracted above) and the specific instructions issued by the Secretary Telangani: Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad, vide 1.r.No.O5O8/ TGCHE/Refuncl of Originalsl2O24 dated 05.O8.2024 to all the Regietrars of the Universities including the 3'-d respondent University herein(referred to and extracted above) and also the UGC Auidelines, dated 23.O4.2OO7 (referred to and extracted above) within a period of one (O1) week fr:om the date of rece!pt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to cost. The miscellaneous applications, if any pendinq, shall stand closed. LI s D I -A H M 5 B iABs'!ru hitTr[HtH //TRUE COPY// sEcrlStroFFlcER 1 rhe Principar secle-tary' Hrsh?81|.:i3Hl',:ffS,T."i[ i?:,,?l6l3l'tBtii!tit Dr.Br Amebdkar l^elang Telangana - 5OOo zt 2 rhe chairm'q€","'"liq;, dr"i3:tT:Xflil".":,"r,f"rj?i'ilflX"-'uF33'S:"]' - Gor"tnment of Telangat 3. The Registrar, Osmania University' O'U' Campus' Hyderabad-500007' .l.::ilrn"jg"*'#H"3li1il$?;,%iiliffi R:!:?1,\i},"':Sl:''Sd'tll '' io " n' n n' Nagar. Beside Ranga ' ihti*ili si,H'l[' i, f#',! ;is'#sl';ssdli" l)fi ! ]'; "' "B x \ To, \

6. One CC to SMT DURGA BHAVANI KONDASANI, Advocate IOPUC] 7. One CC to SRI K.P.VIJAY KUMAR, Advocate IOPUCI B One CC to SRI MALIPEDDI SRINIVAS REDDY, SC FOR OU [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] l 10 Two CD Copies BSR BS HIGH COURT SNJ I t DATED: 1111112025 CC TODAY I ORDER WP.No.33003 of 2025 .p. il- C ,) {i 1i !10! Iffi z * c)E.- ,PATC.Y * I I ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS @k*