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 : 13440 of 2008 Between: M. Hussain Vali S/o M. Dastagiri R/o Kommemarri Village, Peapuli mandal, Kurnool District, Being Minor rep by his natural guardian father, M. Dastagiri. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P., rep by its Secretary, Higher Education Department, A.P. Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 2 Rajeev Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies, IIIT Campus, Gatchibowli, Near Hitch City, Hyderabad, rep by its Vice Chancellor. 3 District Education Officer, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Kurnool 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 Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in denying selection to the petitioner for admission into IIIT Course in "Rajeev Gandhi University Knowledge Technologies" (RGUKT) for the year 2009- 2009 and selecting the other candidates who secured less marks than the petitioner in the kodumur Mandal, Kurnool District, illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to allot a seat to the petitioner for admission into IIT course for the year 2008-09. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.VENKATA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION The Court made the following : O R D E R:- This writ petition has been ﬁled by M.Hussain Vali assailing the action of the respondents in not including his name in the selected list for admission into IIIT Course in Rajeev Gandhi University Knowledge Technologies. Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies (for short “University”) has been established as an autonomous organization by the Government of Andhra Pradesh to educate the gifted rural students who may not have the beneﬁt of special coaching classes. The selection of students for admission into IIIT course in the University is based on the Local Best Model at the Mandal level. There are 6000 seats in all the three institutions of the University. 85% of the seats are reserved for students from rural schools of Andhra Pradesh, 15% of the seats are earmarked for meritorious students at State level. 900 seats are proposed to be ﬁlled up on the basis of statewide merit. 486 seats from open category, 135 seats from S.C. category, 54 seats from S.T. category, 63 seats from BC-A category, 90 seats from BC- B category, 9 seats from BC-C category and 63 seats from BC-D category. The remaining 5100 seats are earmarked for rural students and these seats are allotted to 23 Districts taking the population of the District as criteria. Accordingly, 234 seats have been allotted to Kurnool District. The petitioner studied S.S.C. in Z.P. High School, Laddagiri, Kodumuru Mandal, Kurnool District and secured 531 marks and stood as 2nd topper in the school. The respondents ﬁled counter aﬃdavit wherein the procedure adopted for admission into IIIT Course in R.G.U.K.T. has been detailed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is topper in the school where he studied and therefore, non-inclusion of his name in the selected list for admission into IIIT course in R.G.U.K.T. is not legal and proper. The learned Advocate General submits that communication has been sent to the petitioner detailing the grade points score secured by him and the grade points score secured by Kuruva Ramesh. A copy of the communication sent to the petitioner has been placed on record. As per the communication sent to the petitioner, the petitioner and K.Ramesh secured equal number of grade points. Since K.Ramesh secured more marks in English, he has been preferred following the tie-breaking procedure. For better appreciation, I may refer to the relevant portion of communication sent to the petitioner which is as follows: “Given the principles of admission stated above, we regret to inform that Hussain Vali M is not selected to R.G.U.K.T, IIITs. Hussain Vali belongs to BC-B category from Kodumur Mandal of Kurnool District. He has ranked “2” in his category in his school and is the top student in only three subjects with 80 marks in English and grade point score of 20. Whereas, Kuruva Ramesh, who belongs to the same category in his school, is the top student in 5 subjects and secured 82 marks in English with a grade point score of 20. Hussain Vali is the top student in three subjects with the grade point score of 20 as shown in the scores below: Subjects L1 L2 L3 MA SC SO TOT Marks 90 91 80 99 77 94 531 Grade points 4 4 3 4 2 3 20 For example, Kuruva Ramesh from the same school is the top student in three subjects with the grade point score of 20 and secured more marks in English as shown in the scores below: Subjects L1 L2 L3 MA SC SO TOT Marks 84 67 82 96 91 97 517 Grade points 3 2 4 4 3 4 20 As per the admission procedure, when two or more students are the best students in the same number of subjects, then a tie-breaking procedure is applied as follows (maximum points a student can get is 24). i) If there is more than 1 student who has the maximum number of subjects with 4 points, e.g., 2 students with 4 points in three subjects, then we break this tie by selecting the one with maximum Grade Point Score. ii) If there is further tie, that is they have same number of subjects with 4 points and Grade Point Score, e.g., 4 points in three subjects and 3 points in 1 subject, then we select the one with highest number of marks in English. iii) If there is further tie, then we select the one with highest number of marks in Mathematics. iv) If there is further tie, then we select the one with highest number of marks in Sciences. v) If there is further tie, then we select the one with highest number of total marks. vi) If there is a further tie, the older student (in age) will be selected. Indisputably, the petitioner secured less number of marks in English when compared with those secured by K.Ramesh. Therefore, non-inclusion of the petitioner in the selected list cannot be found fault with. Hence, this Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J 27th August, 2008 bcj