IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 12295 of 2008 Between: Kasturi Nikhitha Rep.by her Father and Natural Guardian Jagadeeswar S/o.Rajanna R/o.Vianayakanagar Jannaram(V) Jannaram(M) Adilabad District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Techonology Rep.by its Vice Chancellor IIIT Campus Gachibowli Hyderabad 2 Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Techonology Rep.by its Decan L.V.A.R Sharma O/o.IIIT Decan Lakadikapool,Hyderabad 3 State Of A.P Rep.by its Principal Secretary Higher Education Department Secretariat Hyderabad 4 The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep.by its Prl Secretary Information Techonology&Communications Dept, Secretariat Hyderabad 5 The Revenue Divisional Officer Mancherial Adilabad District 6 The State of Council for Higher Education Government of Andhra Pradesh Masabtank Hyderabad 7 Embasi Sravani Minor Rep.by her Father E.Malesam R/o.Ram Nagar Near Ramalayam Jannaram (V)&(M) Adilabad 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 a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ,order or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not including the name of the petitioner in the provisions list ﬁnal list for admission into RGU IIIT in Rajiv Gandhi University of knowledge Technologies under 85% quota ear-marked for rural mandals and also 33% reserved for woman candidates as illegal and arbitrary and it is in conﬂict with the admission procedure and the admission rules which were contemplated for such selection and direct the respondents to admit the petitioner to six years integrated programme in Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Techonologies as per the Admission procedure and the rules framed by the University and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.SUBBA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 12295 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been ﬁled by the petitioner 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 including the name of the petitioner in the provisional list/ﬁnal list for admission into Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Petitioner belongs to B.C.’B’ category. She studied in Dwaraka Bharathi Vidyalaya, Ponkal, Jannaram village and Mandal, Adilabad District. She appeared for Xth class examination and secured 540 marks out of 600 marks. The 1st respondent University has been established with an intention to cater to the educational needs of the meritorious rural youth in the State of Andhra Pradesh, as being felt that rural students have inadequate educational opportunities when compared to their urban counterparts. Three fully residential IIITs institutions, one in Basara, Adilabad District; one in Nuzvid, Krishna District; and one in Rajiv Knowledge Valley, Kadapa District are established by Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies. These institutes are said to be specialized in teaching and research in the information technology and other emerging disciplines. 2000 students in each institute are proposed to be admitted for the academic year 2008-09. During such process, a provisional list was prepared for admission in August, 2008. As per the admission procedure adopted by the 1st respondent, the students who stood completed their SSC Examination in ﬁrst attempt in that academic year from the state of Andhra Pradesh are eligible for admission. Admission is based strictly on their performance in S.S.C. Examination. 85% of the seats in each of three institutions are reserved for locals. The petitioner secured 540 marks out of 600 marks. Whereas 7th Respondent secured 526 marks out of 600 marks. The name of the 7th respondent ﬁgured in the selection list and whereas the petitioner name does not figure in provisionally selected list. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Rule nisi came to be issued on18-6-2008. An in terim order has also been passed in WPMP 1583 of 2008 in WPMP 1583 of 2008 directing the petitioner to submit representation to the Governing Council of the 1st respondent University for considering her name for inclusion in the selected list. Pursuant this interim order, the petitioner presented representation and the 1st respondent University considered the representation and communicate its response to the petitioner. 4. Respondent ﬁled common counter in W.P.Nos. 12697 of 2008 and batch and also additional counter aﬃdavit. The procedure adopted for admission into the Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies has been detailed in the counter aﬃdavit. Para 5 of the Additional Counter aﬃdavit needs to be noted and it is thus:- “It is submitted that the petitioner compared with marks obtained by the 7th respondent and contended that the petitioner secured more marks and points than the 7th respondent, but she could not get selected. It is relevant to submit that securing more marks is not the criteria in selecting the students. It is relevant to submit that the 7th respondent belongs to B.C. ‘B’ category and studied SSC from Sri Raja Rajeswara High School, Jannaram and secured 526 marks. As per the grading on the curve, she is the top student in the school having secured 21 grade points and also 3A+ to her credit. Therefore, the 7th respondent has been selected from the said school. The details of the 7th respondent are given below. Nikitha is the top student is only ONE subject with the grade point score of 19 as shown in the scores below:- Subjects L1 L2 L3 MA SC SO TOT Marks 89 86 86 98 87 94 540 Grade Points 3 3 3 4 3 3 19 The selected candidate is Simharajulua Prajapathi from the same school DWARAKA BHARATHI VIDYALAYAM PONKAL-JANNARAM from the same category BC-B is the top student in TWO subjects with the grade point score of 19. Simharajula Prajapathi Subjects L1 L2 L3 MA SC SO TOT Marks 92 84 90 96 95 90 547 Grade Points 3 2 4 3 4 3 19 5. It is suﬃce to refer the admission procedure indicated in the prospectus issued by the 1st respondent University, which reads as hereunder. “1. Admission to each constituent institute of this University will be after passing Secondary School Certiﬁcate ( Tenth Standard) Examination in their ﬁrst attempt in that academic year from the State of A.P. 2. The total intake of the students from Andhra Pradesh will be 6000 at the rate of 2000 per each institute at Basara, Idupulapaya and Nuzavedu. 3. There will be no entrance examination and admission will be strictly based on student’s performance in the SSC Examination. 4. Out of the total number of seats, 15% of seats ( as per the Presidential order, i.e. 300 seats per institute will be open for state level toppers irrespective of their regioin, rural/urban background, category etc., while respecting the reservation norms. 5. In order to promote national integration and promote diversity, about 100 seats per institute (over and above 2000 seats) will be open for other state students and admission will be on the basis of their combined merit in the State Board/AIEEE and interview. Preference will be given to the students coming from rural areas of the country. 6. For 85% of the seats, a region wise allocation will be as per the provisions of Presidential order and based on the census 2001. Accordingly, the region wise allocation is as follows: Coastal Andhra 42% Rayalaseema-22% and Telangana-36%. 7. The region wise allocation will be proportionately distributed among the districts and further among Rural Mandals as per the share of their population vis-à-vis the district based on the 2001 census. The tables below show the seat allocation by region and by district for each reservation category. 8. Seats in the District will be divided amongst all educational institutes (government/local bodies, aided and private) located in rural mandals subject to the condition that not more than one student from each category will be selected per school. 9. The category wise reservation of seats will be BC-25%, SC- 15%, ST 6% and Open 54%. B.C. category will be further subdivided into subcategories as per Government order, 33 percent of the seats in each category will be reserved for women candidates. 10. Rural Mandal is taken as a unit in selection of suitable candidates. 11 Assignments to Mandals may often lead to fractional seats. These fractions are added with other neighbouring mandals until a single seat can be allotted to a group of Mandals. 12. The top student from each in a rural mandal is selected. The best student is deﬁned to be the top student in more subjects than his/her class mates in the same school. 13. The selection of best student is based on the principle of grading –0n-the-curve. The principle of grading-on-the-curve works as follows: The top 3% of the students in each school in a given subject is given Grade A+ (4 points); the next 7% is given Grade A ( 3 points) ; the next 10% is given Grade A-(2 points), and the next 30% is given a Grade B (1 point). A cumulative Grade point score is calculated by adding the scores for all the subjects for each student in every school. 14. The Grade Point Score for all the students in the state is computed. The State wise Merit List candidates are selected representing the best students in each reservation category across the State. 15. 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). We ﬁrst select students who have the maximum by number of subjects within 4 points.) 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”. 6. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Advocate General appearing for Respondents 1 to 6. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the topper in the school and therefore, she is to be preferred from the school where she studied. 8. Learned Advocate General submits that the petitioner is not a topper in the school where she studied and one Simharajula Prajapathi is the top students and in which case the petitioner cannot have any grievance. The comparative marks secured by the petitioner and Simharajula Prajapathi have been stated in the communication sent to the petitioner. The comparative table reads as hereunder. Nikitha (Petitioner) Subjects L1 L2 L3 MA SC SO TOT Marks 89 86 86 98 87 94 540 Grade Points 3 3 3 4 3 3 19 Simharajula Prajapathi Subjects L1 L2 L3 MA SC SO TOT Marks 92 84 90 96 95 90 547 Grade Points 3 2 4 3 4 3 19 9. Since Simharajula Prajapathi is the top student in two subjects, he is to be treated as the best students in the school as per the admission procedure. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that he is the topper in the school has no substance. 10. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________________ Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy 29th August, 2008. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 12295 OF 2008 29th August, 2008.