IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SUNDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 10246 of 2009 Between: M.Raja sekhara Reddy S/o.M.Srinivas Reddy R/o.H.No.A-2/5, MLA Quarters,Erram manzil Punjagutta, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Registrar,Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Hyderabad 2 The Controller of Examinations, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad 3 The Principal, V.N.R.VIgnana Jyothi Institute of Engineering & Technology,Bachpally ,Kukatpally, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS 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 any writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear the first year B.Tech CSE Examination by condoning the shortage of attendance which is to be held on 4.6.2009. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.A.K.MUKHEED Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.RATHANGA PANI REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 10246 of 2009 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to appear for the first year B.Tech CSE examinations by condoning the shortage of attendance of the petitioner in exercise of the powers conferred under the Academic Regulations made by the Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU) is arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner is a student of Engineering course in the third respondent-college. He was not allowed to appear for the examinations on the ground that he had put in less than 75% of attendance in aggregate in the first year. The petitioner claims that he had participated in Football match in the month of October, 2008 and therefore, he is entitled for 21% sports attendance and if the same is taken into consideration, he had 66% of attendance. Thus according to the petitioner the shortage of attendance could have been condoned in exercise of power conferred on the College Academic Committee under Section 6(ii) of the Academic Regulations made by the JNTU. It is also contended by the petitioner that the shortage of attendance in his case was for genuine and valid grounds and therefore, the College Academic Committee, who is the competent authority ought to have condoned the shortage of attendance and ought to have permitted him to appear for the examinations. However, in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent-college, it is alleged that the petitioner had put in only 43% of attendance. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. As held by this Court in W.P.No.24114 of 2008 and batch dated 30.06.2009, shortage of attendance below 65% in aggregate shall not be condoned in any case. However, if the shortage is between 65% and 75%, the College Academic Committee is competent to condone the same for genuine reasons. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner herein is disputing the version of the college that he had only 43% of attendance and claims that he had attendance above 65%, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to make an appropriate representation before the University as well as the College putting forth his case along with supporting material on or before 31-07-2009. If any such application is made within the time prescribed above, the College Academic Committee shall consider the same in accordance with law and submit its report to the University within one week thereafter. On the basis of such report, the University shall pass a final order with regard to eligibility of the petitioner to appear for the examinations. Till such time, the petitioner shall be permitted to appear for the next semester classes subject to the final order that may be passed by the University. It is made clear that this shall not entitle the petitioner to claim any equities in case the decision of the University goes against him. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 22-07-2009 Note: Issue C.C. in 2 days. B/o KLP