HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY Dated: 02-12-2009 WRIT APPEAL No. 1393 OF 2009 Between: Jillepally Karthik ... APPELLANT AND Osmania University, rep., by its Registrar, Hyderabad and another ... RESPONDENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL No. 1393 OF 2009 JUDGMENT: (per Sri C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J) This writ appeal arises out of order dated 12-11-2009 in Writ Petition No. 24488 of 2009, whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant. The appellant is a student of engineering of respondent No.2 – College. During the first semester of III year of engineering, the appellant fell short of the required attendance as he had only 56% of attendance as against the minimum of 65% for the purpose of seeking condonation of shortage of attendance. The plea of the appellant raised in the writ petition to permit him to appear for the examination has been rejected by the learned single Judge. The appellant therefore filed the present appeal. At the hearing, Sri Aka Venkataramana, the learned counsel for the appellant while not disputing the fact that his client has put in only 56% of attendance, however, submitted that in a similar circumstance, the learned single Judge in the case of G. Shivabhishek Vs. Osmania University (Writ Petition No. 24067 of 2009) directed the petitioner therein to appear in the first semester of III year B.E examination subject to verification of the attendance of the student. Having carefully gone through the said order, we are of the view that the said case stands on a completely different footing because in that case, the plea of the petitioner was that if attendance was properly calculated, he would be putting in the required attendance. In the light of the said plea, the learned single Judge gave direction to permit the petitioner therein to appear for the examination subject to verification of the attendance. In this case, it is not the case of the appellant that he has put in required percentage of attendance rendering him eligible to appear for the examinations. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to the dismissal of the appeal, WAMP No. 2904 of 2009, filed by the appellant for interim relief, is also dismissed. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 02-12-2009 ks