IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 23997 of 2008 Between: B. Shiva, S/o. B. Mallesham, R/o. H.No. 1-16-712/5, Srinagar Colony, Sirpur Kagaznagar, Adilabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Aurora's Scientific Technological & Research Academy Bandlaguda, Hyderabad - 500 005. Rep. by its Principal. 2 Jahawarlal Nehru Technological University Rep. by its Registrar Masab Tank, 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 a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to exercise their powers under Regulation 5 (ii) of J.N.T.U. Academic Regulations and grant petition condonation of shortage of attendance up to 10% thereby entitling petition for promotion besides being eligible to sit for the examinations of 1st Semester of II year B.Tech Course. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Y.ASHOK RAJ 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 : 23997 of 2008 O R D E R : ` This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the inaction on the part of the respondents in 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 first 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. The petitioner claims that he had put in 65% of attendance and therefore, as per Section 6(ii) of the Academic Regulations made by the JNTU, the College Academic Committee is competent to grant the condonation of shortage of attendance. 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 the petitioner to appear for the examinations. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Under Regulation 6(ii), shortage of attendance in aggregate up to 10% i.e. 65 % and above and below 75% in each semester or I years, may be condoned by the College Academic Committee. Section 6(vi) makes it clear that such condonation can be granted where genuine and valid grounds are made out. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner herein, even according to the respondents had 65% of attendance, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for consideration by the College Academic Committee for condonation of shortage of attendance, provided valid grounds are made out by the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to make an appropriate representation before the University as well as the College explaining the reasons for his absence 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