High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a'writ' order or direction more particutarty one in the nature of decrarins the action of the 2nd and3rd respondents in not ::H;il::" d s co nt n u.. *Jil 1 ?, ,.;";: ;;;ff]'::,;:::ffi';T;,,f ;: ff ::: ;fiJ::?LJ:'Jffi::::"Jfoe as i,esar arbitrary and viorative orArricre 14 rn r h e p e t t o n el,l :,ff :: _,,:.::: :,,:T : j::,:[Tff :::LT : ;[: ; i:,, cerriricate, o ."ll;:"il::,#;:f:[ff::ilr""te, 3,ntermediate Transfer certificate, to the petitioner :; Marks ates-2 and 5. lntermediate IA :10F Petition under Section 151 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 2nd and 3rd Respondents to return back the petitioner's original certificates viz 1. Secondary School Statement of Marks, 2. Secondary School Pass Certificate, 3. lntermediate Certificate, 4. School & lntermediate study Certificates-2 and 5. lntermediate Transfer Certificate, to the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI L.RAM SINGH Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FW Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI T.SHARATH, SC FOR KNRUHS counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI SRINIVAS RAO PACHWA The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON,BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA DATE: O1.12.2O25 Between : Syeda Shaima And The State of Telangana' U"Oi.at Health & Family Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & two others Petitioner Respondents ORDER: Heard sri L. Ram singh, learned counset appearing on beha lf of the petitioner, tearned Government pteader for Medical Health and Family welfare, appearing on beharf of respondent No.1, and rearned standing counset appearing on beharf of respondent Ng.2, and sri srinivas Rao Pachwa, learned counset appearing on behalf of respondent No.3.

2. oraver as under: ""'to issue a writ, order or Directlbn more particurarry one in the nature of Wr.oiptanaamu, JuIfl.,ng the action of the 2nd and s'o iu-rponaunti in iJt''ilrrrning I I 2 SN, J wP _33648302s the original academic qualification certificates of the petitioner who has discontinued study of Bachelor of bental Sciences (BDS) Course in the i't year in the 3'd respondent Dental College as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution fo India and consequently direct the 2nd and 3'd respondents to return the petitioner's original certificates viz 1. Secondary School Statement of Marks, 2. Secondary School Pass Certificate, 3. Intermediate Marks Certificate, 4. School & Intermediate Study Certificates-2 and 5' Intermediate iransfer Certificate, to the petitioner and pass any such other order..."

3. The case of the petitioner' in brief is that the petitioner was allotted a seat in BDS Course in Balaji Dental College' Moinabad, under Management Quota Category and the petitioner had joined in the said college on 03'10'2024 by paying 1't year fees Rs.5,65,000/- and submitted all the original educational documents' After taking admission' the petitioner felt sick and the petitioner's health deteriorated day by day' the petitioner was unable to continue BDS course and discontinued the said course. It is further the case of the petitioner that when the petitioner requested for return of the original educational certificates, the respondent authorities refused to release the original certificates and fufther demanded to pay balance fee of towards penalty for entire BDS course and also Rs'20'00'000/- \ ; J SN, J wP 33648 2025 discontinuation of the course. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD (A) UGC ouidelines, dated 23.04.2OO7, in oarticular, "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 opportunit ies for the candidates from exercising other options of ing other institutions of their choice. However, it would not be permissible for institutions and Universities to retain the

5. The Division Bench of this court in its Judgment dated 24.0L.2020 passed in w.p. No.2 rr37 of 2otg in D.vaishnavi vs. state of Terangana had struck down paragraph No.7 (iii) of G.O.Ms.No.114, dated OS.O7.2O17 i.€., original certil.icates submitte d by the petitioner/candidate sha, not to be refurned to them, till they complete their course of study and appear for the University examination holding it as unr-constitutional. simirar view was take n by this court in Mahatma Gandhi law college, NTR Nagar, Hyderabad v. state of Teran gana vide Judgment dated 0g.72.2022 passed in w.p. No.22417 of 2078. A simirar view was arso taken vide Judgment of this court dated A 4 SN, J wP_33648 2025

29.t0.2024 passed in W.P.No.25559 of 2024 in Lakshmi Saranya v. The State of Telangana.

6. 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' imoermissible in law' academicqualificationcertificatesofthepetitionerwhohad 14and3oo-AoftheConstitutionoflndia;Parano.7(iii)of

30. Therefore' the Writ Petition is allowed; the action of the 3rd respondent-College in not returning the original discontinued study of M'B'B'S' I 'year course in the said college, is declared as illegal' arbitrary and violative of Article G.O.MS'No'114' Health' Medical and Family Welfare (C'1) Department, dt'05' 07 '2OL7 is declared to be ultra vires the powers of the State Government under the Telangana Educatiorral Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act' 1983 (Act 5 of 1983); and qualification certificates of the petitioner to her' No the3rdrespondentisforthwithdirectedtoreturntheoriginal academic costs." \ \ 5 SN, J wP 33548 2025 7 t, B

9. are methods of recovering the outstanding school the school' "8. There fees with No such suit as been in stituted by ResPondent School for the recovery h of outstanding fees I & ",*a*jeileed"1, 6 wP_33648_:uj ')

10. The Madras High Court in R. Pradeep Raj v. comrnissioner, the Directorate of Technicat Education reported in 2019 SCC Online Mad.9385, and this Court in Kaluri shiva sai Teja vs. The state of Terangana in w'P'No'2930 0f 2022, dated 24.06.2,,22 and D.vaishnavi vs' state of Tetangana, represented by its prinicipar secretary Hearth Medicar and Famiry werfare, Hydeabad in w'P'No' 21137 0f 2019, dated 24.0r.2020 and atso the High court of Andhra pradesh at Amaravati in Andrha Pradesh private Unaided schoors Management Association v' The state of Andhra pradesh in w.p.No.g606 0f 2021 dated 27 'ro'2021 directed the concerned corege aUthOfities tO feturn the certificates and sranted litrertv to \ .a 3 I I I I 7 SN' J wP 33648 2025 availing legal remedies in to claim fee bY the college similar circumstances' dated 24'O,:'2O2O

11. Based on the Division Bench ludgment of this Court passed in W'P'No' 2tL37 of 2O19' this Court had allowed W'P'No'34185 of 2O23 vide its order dated 03'06'20 24 granting identical relief as granted in W.P.No' 2tL37 of 2O19' t2. This Court opines that UGC by its guidelines (referred to andextractedabove)haddirectedtheUniversities,towhichthe colleges like the 3.d respondent are affiliated, to initiate action whensuchinstancesarebroughttotheirnoticeandinspiteof theaforesaidguidelinesissuedbytheUGC,noactionisbeing taken,andontheotherhand,students,likethepetitioner,are forcedtoapproachthisCourtseekingreturnoforiginalsandonly after orders are passed by this court, the originals are being returnedtothestudents,notwithstandingthefactthatthe collegesliketherespondentNo'3'haveanyclaimtowardsfee' thesaidinstitutionsarerequiredtoinitiateproceedingsfor recoveryoffeeduesandcannotresorttowithholdingof certificatesofthestudentsinviolationoftheUGCguidelines. I .:ct"l,f;$;!!r;- * 8 ,a_rr** ![i I

13. Learned counsel .rppearing on behaff of the Fetitioner rnainry contends that the subject issue in the present writ Fetition sguarety covered by the order of this Court dated 24.O1.2O2O passed in W.p.No. 2ll37of 2OI9 and the order dated 22.1O.2O25 passed in W.p.No.3 2404 of 2O25. Learned Governrnent pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents does not dispute the said submission made by the tearned counset appearing on behatf of the petitioner. 14' This court opines that the respondents 2 and 3 cannot withhord the petitionert originar certificates such as 1) Secondary schoor Statement of Mark s, 2) secondary schoor Pass certificate, 3) Intermediate Marks certificat e, 4) schoor & Intermediate Study certificates and 5) Intermediate Transfer certificate, under any pretext. There is no rien 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 cannot be denied by the concerned authorities mgfgly beCaUSe the tuition fee is due and if anv amount is due from the petitioner towards such fees' the proper course \ \ \ 9 SN, J wP_3364E_2025 available to the respondents is to initiate appropriate proceedings against the petitioner for recovery before the competent Court and coercive tactics cannot be adopted by the respondents to make the petitioner to pay the tuition fee. This Court opines that there is no justification on the part of the respondents 2 and 3 in withholding the original Certificates of the petitioner for non-payment of tuition fee. 15- A bare perusal of the record indicates that 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. Therefore dury taking into consideration the view of the various High courts on the subject issue in various JudgmenB, referred to and extracted above, this court opines that petitioner is entired for grant of rerief as prayed for in the present writ petition.

16. case, (a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the t0 SN, J wP 33648 2025 t (b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counse! appearing on behalf of the respondents, (c) 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), (e) The The UGC guidelines, dated 23'o4 '2oo7 t Writ Petition is allowed as prayed for' The respondents are directed to return all original certificates of the petitioner i.e., (1) secondary school statement of Marks, (2) Secondary School Pass Certificate' (3) Intermediate Marks Certificate' (4) School and Intermediate Study Certificates and (5) Intermediate Transfer Certificate submitted by the petitioner at the time of admission into the 3'd Respondent College herein' by duly taking into consideration the observations in the (referred to and extracted above) and also the UGC guidelines' dated 23'O4'2OO7 (referred to and extracted above)' within a period of one (o1) week various iudgments 1l SN. J wP_33648_2025 from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to cost. The miscellaneous appiications, if any pendlng, shall stand closed. t P. PONNA /ffRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

2. Principal Secretary, Medical Health and Fam erabad, State of Telangana.

1. The Hvd The Registrar, Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences' Warangal' The Principal, Balaji Dental College, Moinabad, Telangana One CC to SRI L.RAM SINGH, Advocate TOPUCI One CC to SRI SRINIVAS RAO PACHWA, Advocate [OPUC]

5. Dept, Secretariat, One CC to SRI T.SHARATH, SC for KNRUHS [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Medical, Heatth and Family Welfare, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies b.

7. 8 BSR MP HIGH COURT r=l.l i 0111212025 -: WP.No.33648 of 2025 CC TODAY lHE si.+ i:175 C-:.rl ), lt 'rt:5.tr' ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIO WITHOUT COSTS t \\