THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.3162 of 2008 Dated: 29.09.2010 Between: Sri Annamacharya College of Education, New Boyanapalli, Rajampet, Cuddapah District, Rep. by its Correspondent & Secretary Sri M.Penchalaiah. .. Petitioner. And The Government of A.P. rep. by its Secretary, School Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, and others. .. Respondents. ORDER: It appears, petitioner-Sri Annamacharya College of Education, New Boyanapalli, Rajampet, Cuddapah District, is a recognized private Unaided Institution. According to the petitioner, as per G.O.Ms.No.92, dated 16.11.2006, issued by the Government, 20% of the total sanctioned intake of seats in B.Ed Course were allotted to the management and 80% seats were to be filled with the candidates on the basis of rank obtained in Ed.CET Convenor-AC SW-II, and that under 20% Management quota, the percentage of admission of the candidates in four methodologies are (i) Social Studies-6, (ii) Mathematics-6, (iii) Physical Sciences-3 and (iv) Biological Sciences- 5. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the advertisements given by it in leading newspapers like Eenadu and Vaartha, inviting candidates for admission into B.Ed Course under 20% Management quota for the academic year 2006-07, 16 students were admitted against the management quota and their names were sent for approval. The petitioner contends that under 20% Management quota, except the seats of Social Studies methodology, the seats of other Methodologies were not filled due to non-availability of the candidates in those methodologies, and therefore, it filled those left over seats of other methodologies with the candidates of Social Studies methodology, but it did not exceed the 20% limit of Management quota. However, by the impugned letter dated 20.11.2007 addressed by the Secretary, A.P.State Council of Higher Education, the 3rd respondent herein, the names of three students, whose names were shown at Sl.Nos.12, 15 and 16 in the list furnished by the petitioner seeking approval of their admission, were deleted from the said list for certain deficiencies stated therein. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed this writ petition seeking appropriate directions. While admitting the writ petition on 18.02.2008, this Court passed interim orders in W.P.M.P.No.4127 of 2008, which reads as under: “Following the interim order of a Division Bench of this Court, dated 04.02.2008, in W.A.M.P.No.158 of 2008 in W.A.No.69 of 2008, it is directed that the two students of the petitioner College, who were admitted into Social Studies Methodology in B.Ed Course in excess of the permitted seats in the methodology and whose names have been deleted by the impugned order, dated 20.11.07, of the 3rd respondent, shall be permitted to appear at the final B.Ed Examinations. However, these students shall not be entitled to claim any equity and their results at this examination shall also not be declared by the respondents without further orders from this Court.” Today, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that B.Ed Course for the year 2006-07 was already completed, and that the students, who were admitted into Social Studies Methodology in excess of the permitted seats and whose names were deleted by the impugned order, appeared for the Examination and their results are not declared, in view of the interim orders dated 18.02.2008 passed by this Court. He also submits that in identical circumstances, this Court disposed of similar writ petitions directing the authorities to declare the results and take appropriate action as per law and, therefore, this writ petition may also be disposed of with similar directions. In the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondents are directed to declare the results of the candidates, whose results were withheld in view of the interim orders passed by this Court in W.P.M.P.No.3162 of 2008 dated 18.02.2008, and take appropriate action as per law. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 29.09.2010 v v