THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25236 of 2014 Dated: 15.10.2014 Between:
Swathi College of Pharmacy .. Petitioner and Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Anantapur, Rep. by its Registrar and another.
.. Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Gaddam Srinivas Counsel for respondent No.1: Mr. T.K. Raghavan Counsel for respondent No.2: AGP for Higher Education The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside proceedings in Lr.No.JNTUA/SCP/ForeignStudentAdmissions/2014 dated 12.08.2014 of respondent No.1, whereby it has informed the petitioner that it cannot permit the students of the petitioner to continue to pursue their B. Pharmacy course without approval of their admission by the A.P. State Council of Higher Education.
I have heard the learned counsel for both parties and perused the record.
It is not in dispute that so far, the petitioner has not secured approval of the A.P. State Council of Higher Education for conducting the B.Pharmacy course. In W.P.No.20560 of 2014 filed by the petitioner, questioning the action of the A.P. State Council of Higher Education in not approving the admission of its students into B.Pharmacy course, this Court has passed an interim order in W.P.M.P.No.25792 of 2014 on 28.07.2014, directing the Government of A.P. to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 16.06.2014 as per G.O.Rt.No.151 Higher Education (EC.2) Department dated 03.04.2012, only after the petitioner undergoing the process as per G.O.Ms.No.49 dated 25.06.2013, and take a decision after completing the above exercise. Pending such exercise, respondent No.1 herein was directed not to cancel the examinations attended by petitioners 2 to 26 therein. This Court has left it open to respondent No.1 herein (mistakenly referred as respondent No.2 in the order instead of referring as respondent No.3) to take appropriate action after the petitioner’s representation is disposed of by the State Government.
Mr. T.K. Raghavan, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1, on instructions, submitted that in pursuance of the said direction issued by this Court, respondent No.1 has not cancelled the examinations attended by petitioners 2 to 26 in the said writ petition and that by the impugned order, respondent No.1 has merely cautioned the petitioner that if it does not obtain approval from the A.P. State Council of Higher Education, it will not be possible for the University to permit the students to continue with course.
In view of the clarification issued by the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 that as of now, there is no immediate threat to the petitioner from the University either with regard to continuance of the course or the examinations already written by the students, no specific relief need be granted in favour of the petitioner in this writ petition. The petitioner is entitled to pursue W.P.No.20560 of 2014 for appropriate relief against the A.P. State Council of Higher Education.
Subject to the liberty given to the petitioner as above, the writ petition is disposed of.
As a sequel to the disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.31579 of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 15th October, 2014 IBL