THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI W.P.No.16671 of 2011 Between: Ravalapati Krishnakanth PETITIONER And 1. The Jawaharlal Nehru Technical University (JNTU) rep. by its Controller of Examinations, JNTU, Kakinada, East Godavari District, and another. RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioners: Sri T.D. Phani Kumar Counsel for the respondents: Sri Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner has approached this Court to declare the action of the respondents in detaining him from attending II Semester 1st year B.Tech., examination on the ground of shortage of attendance, and consequently direct the respondents to condone the shortage of 1.5% attendance from the minimum required attendance. It is his case that due to typhoid fever he was unable to attend the college for more than 25 days and he was totally bed ridden. Admittedly, the petitioner put up 63.5% attendance in the II Semester of the 1st year course. As per regulation 6 of the Academic Regulations a student should have a minimum of 75% of attendance in aggregate of all the subjects for acquiring credits in the 1st year and / or each Semester 3rd year, permitting condonation of shortage of attendance up to 10% (65% and above and below 75%) in each Semester or 1st year. It also says that a student will not be permitted to the next Semester unless she satisfies the attendance requirement of the present Semester / 1st year and shortage of attendance below 65% in aggregate in no case be condoned. The impact of this regulation was examined by a learned Division Bench of this Court in B. Yugandhar v. Principal, Kuppam Engineering College[1] wherein this Curt considering the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar Thakur v. University of Himachal Pradesh[2] and on a judgment of this Court in M.S. Chakravarthi v. Principal, Sri Kalahasteeswara Institute of Technology[3], held that the Court cannot issue a judicial fiat to the respondents to admit the student therein in 1st Semester examination of the 4th year when he does not satisfy the minimum attendance and thereby violate the mandate of Regulation 5 of the Academic Regulations. In the aforesaid judgment, the learned Division Bench has categorically held that in the light of the provisions of the regulations the students are not liable for condonation of delay falling below 65%. In the instant case, no doubt this Court by orders dated 16.06.2011 permitted the petitioner to appear for the II Semester examination of the 1st year. Even if the petitioner has been permitted for the said examination, the same cannot be a ground to condone the shortage of attendance. The Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment has also considered this aspect of the matter also. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the interim order dated 11.03.2011 stands vacated. _________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 26th August, 2011. Js. [1] 2008 (2) ALT 529 (D.B.) [2] (1973) 2 SCC 298 [3] 2005 (2) ALT 184 (D.B.)