IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 12400 of 2008 Between: 1. Toka Nagendra, S/o. Chinna Narasimhulu, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 2 Boya Chennakesavulu, S/o. Venkataramudu, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 3 Lepakshi Ganesh, S/o. Sajappa, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 4 Shaik Idiathullah Basha, S/o. Mehboob Basha, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 5 Budabukkala Narasappa, S/o. Late Ramaswamy, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 6 Boya Vijaya, S/o. Venkatramudu, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 7 Harijan Ashok, S/o. Babayya, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 8 Talari Hari, S/o. Ramakrishnamma (Mother), Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 9 Kamsali Karthik, S/o.Nagamani, (Mother) Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 10 Yerrambali Nagarjuna, S/o. Babayya, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 11 Ediga Pratap, S/o. Ramana, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 12 Settipalli Ramesh, S/o. Nagaraju, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 13 Gangapalli Suresh, S/o. Narasimhulu, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 14 Gajula Ramanjaneyulu, S/o. Kistapa, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. 15 Mekala Ramesh, S/o. Gangamma, Rep. by their Caretaker, K.R. Paramahamsa, IAS (Retired), 70 Years, S/o. Late K. Viswanadham Honorary Director, Sri Sathya Sai Deenajanooddharana Pathakamu, Puttaparthi, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies, Premises of the Commissioner of School Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad - 500 004. 2 A.P. State Council of Higher Education, Rep. by its Secretary, Mahavir Marg, Masabtank, Hyderabad - 500 028. 3 A.P. International Institute of Information Technology, Basara, Adilabad District. 4 A.P. International Institute of Information Technology, Nuzivid, Krishna District. 5 A.P. International Institute of Information Technology, Edupulapaya, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not giving an opportunity to the minor Petitioners to seek admission in the Institutes of Respondents 3 to 5 by limiting selection of the students to the APP and Govt aided Schools that seek qualifying students in the SSC of the AP State Board of Secondary Education in March 2008 only, as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential order directing the respondents to permit the minor petitioners to seek admission in the institutes of Respondents 3 to 5 in the quota earmarked for Bcs/SCs on the basis of the marks awarded in SSC Examination by the concerned Board, treating the State as a unit and not the mandals, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.D.V.SITARAMAMURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: C.SUDESH ANAND(SC FOR APSCHE) The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 12400 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been ﬁled by the petitioners with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not providing an opportunity to the petitioners to seek admissions in the Institutes of Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technolgies-1st respondent. 2. The writ petitioners are destitute boys. They are trained to appear for secondary and senior secondary examinations conducted by the National Institute of Open Schooling, New Delhi, which corresponds to the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) apart from vocational skills. The petitioners appeared for class Xth (Secondary Board) Examination of the NIOS held in April and May, 2008. According to the petitioners, the authorities have not chosen to consider the students perused their Xth class in National Institute of Open School, New Delhi and there the action of the authorities cannot be justified. For better understanding the grievance of the petitioners, I deem it appropriate to refer paras 7 to 9 of the writ affidavit and they read as follows: “7. I respectfully submit that, vide item 6 a) above, the students qualifying in any SSC examination ( Class X) are eligible for consideration for admission to the course. But it appears that the Respondents have sought the lists of students from high schools in each revenue mandal that passed the SSC examination of the AP State Board of Secondary Education in March, 2008 only with highest marks in diﬀerent caste groups. Surpirisingly, they have omitted to consider the claims of students passing the SSC examination of other Boards such as the National Institute of Open Schooling, the Central Board of Secondary Education, etc., Further the lists seem to have been made without reference to any application from the students for such admission, rather without their knowledge. It is also open to doubt how the reservation proposed in para 5 (d) can be adhered to when the selection of the students is made with each revenue mandal as the unit. Incidentally, the revenue mandals are only units of administration, and are not equal in area or population or resources. 8. I respectfully submit that the Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies is a statutory University created by the State Government of Andhra Pradesh, similar to the JNTU Its constitutent Institutes – the three APIIITs – are state level centers for higher education similar to the engineering colleges in the state aﬃliated to diﬀerent universities. The norms of admission of students to these centers ought to be similar to the procedure of admission to the engineering colleges in the state with due reservation to diﬀerent categories, and application of the principle of local/non-local status as stipulated in the A.P. Educational Institutions ( Regulation of Admission) Order, 1974 and amended in G.O.P.lNo. 464 Edn ( W) Dept. dated 10-7-1979 – the Presidential Order. 9. I respectfully submit that the minor petitioners, tweleve of whom are BCs and three SCs all being destitute, and belonging to rural areas of Anantapur District, had hoped that they would be able to secure admission into the ApIIIT at Edupulapaya in Kadapa District in the ensuing academic year. Though the rules provide that the students qualifying in SSC ( of any Board) will be eligible for consideration for such admission, the fact that the authorities have chosen to nominate SSC students of the A.P. State Board passing out of the ZPP and Govt. aided schools in March, 2008 only, with each mandal as unit, even without the knowledge or the consent of the students so selected, has depressed them the most. IT is respectfully submitted that the criteria of selection, on the face of it, is detrimental to the interests of more deserving and less fortunate students such as the destitute minor petitioners herein for the only reason that they have sought to qualify in the SSC examination of a diﬀerent Board, though they have equal or better credentials for such admission”. 3. Rule nisi came to be issued on 9-7-2008. When the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that a notiﬁcation is being issued tomorrow with regard to the receiving applications from CBSE (reserved) candidates and if the institution where the petitioners studied is recognized by any of the Universities/Board of Intermediate Education in the State of A.P., the petitioners are at liberty to submit their applications for admission in IIIT course conducted by Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies. 4. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioners to make application to the 1st respondent seeking admission under reserved category as and when notiﬁcation is issued by the 1st respondent calling for the applications from the CBSE (reserved) candidates. The 1st respondent shall consider the applications of the petitioners, in case, the school where they studied is recognized by any of the Universities/Board of Intermediate Education in the State of Andhra Pradesh. No order as to costs. ______________________________ Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy 27th August, 2008. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 12400 OF 2008 27th August, 2008