IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 787 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 07/07/2008 in WP NO : 22438 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 The Secretary, State Board of Technical Education & Training,BRKR Bhavan, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad 2 The Principal , Government Polytechnic, Kothagudem Khammam District 3 The Commissioner & Director of Technical Education Government of Andhra Pradesh, 5th Block, BRKR Govt. Offices Building, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad-500029 ..... APPELLANTS AND 1 Mohd.Tayyab S/o.Md.Yakub r/o.7-69/1, Beside Mosque, Burgumpahad, Khammam District-507114 2 The Principal Government Polytechnic, Kothagudem, Khammam District. 3 The Commissioner & Director of Technical Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, 5th Block, B.R.K.R. Govt. Offices Building, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad – 500 029 .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants : MR.P.V.S.S.S.RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 787 of 2008 JUDGMENT : (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy) This writ appeal is ﬁled by the State Board of Technical Education and Training, Andhra Pradesh through its Secretary, aggrieved by the order of learned single Judge, dated 7th July 2008 passed in writ petition No.22438 of 2007. 2. The 1st respondent has ﬁled the aforesaid writ petition when he was not allowed to write the Diploma Examinations in Mechanical Engineering, which were to be held from 25.10.2007 onwards. Originally, the 1st respondent/writ petitioner was admitted to the course of Diploma in Mechanical Engineering during the academic year 1998-99. After completing the 1st year and 2nd year course during the years 2000 and 2001, he was not allowed to write the examinations on the ground that he did not satisfy the criteria of putting-in the minimum attendance required to appear for the examinations. When he was not permitted to write the examinations, he approached this Court, and a Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 25th of August 2004 in writ appeal No.2099 of 2002, permitted the 1st respondent/writ petitioner to repeat the third year course with changed curriculum, and to satisfy the eligibility criteria of required attendance. Accordingly, though the 1 st respondent was permitted to write the examinations, he did not complete the course. Further, when the examinations were notiﬁed on 25.10.2007 and not allowed to write the same on the ground that he was not eligible, he ﬁled writ petition No.22438 of 2007. Pursuant to the interim orders granted in the writ petition, the 1st respondent/writ petitioner has already appeared for the examinations. By the impugned order, the learned single Judge directed the appellant-Board to announce the examination result of the 1st respondent/writ petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ appeal is filed by the appellant/Board. 3. In this appeal, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant Sri P.V.S.S.S.Rama Rao that as per the academic regulations, the 1st respondent is not entitled to continue the course. He relied on Regulation No.XVI of the Academic Regulations framed by the Board in support of his argument. 4. It is to be seen that in this case, the 1st respondent/writ petitioner has already appeared for the examinations pursuant to the interim orders of this Court. Though it is submitted that he is not eligible to write further examinations, but however, that was not the subject matter of the writ petition. In that view of the matter, we do not ﬁnd any error committed by the learned single Judge in directing the appellant-Board to announce the results of the examinations written by the 1st respondent/writ petitioner, pursuant to the interim orders. However, we leave it open for the appellant-Board to decide whether the 1st respondent/writ petitioner be allowed to write further examinations, in the event of his not completing the course by passing all the subjects now, in view of Regulation No.XVI of the Academic Regulations. 4. Subject to the above observations, the writ appeal is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 31st July 2008 ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J ajr To 1. The Principal, Government Polytechnic, Kothagudem, Khammam District. 2. The Commissioner & Director of Technical Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, 5th Block, B.R.K.R. Govt. Offices Building, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad – 500 029