Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Pasupuleti Koteswara Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 14 December, 2020
Bench: C.Praveen Kumar, D Ramesh
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
W.P. No.10319 of 2019 and
W.P. Nos.22553, 22741 and 23233 of 2020
COMMON ORDER :(per the Hon'ble Sri Justice C.Praveen Kumar)
1. As the issue involved in all the Writ Petitions being the same, they are disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The issue that stems out for consideration is, whether the petitioners in all these cases can be treated as local candidates for admission into MBBS/BDS course for the academic year 2020-2021.
3. The petitioner in W.P.No.22553 of 2020 and W.P.No.10319 of 2019 being one and the same, as W.P.No.10319 of 2019 came to be filed for a similar declaration in the previous academic year.
The facts, in nutshell, are that the petitioner studied classes III to X at Loyola Public School, Nallapadu, Guntur. After completing his X class, joined XI class at De Paul International Residential School, Mysore and completed the XII class in April 2019. After obtaining the certificate from the concerned, he appeared in the entrance examination conducted by Medical Council of India, which is known as NEET. The 2nd respondent published a list of candidates, who appeared for the exam relating to Andhra Pradesh State, 2 with cut off mark at 113. The cut off mark of general category was said to have been stipulated at '147'. The petitioner secured 565 marks out of 720 and he was placed at serial No.1517 under EWS category. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent issued prospectus/regulations for submission of online application forms for admission into the course for the academic year 2020-2021. The candidates, who have secured more than the cut off marks, submitted their online applications, depending upon their eligibility, for allotment of seats under the competent authority quota. The petitioner also submitted his application within the time prescribed. In one of the columns prescribed, the petitioner stated that he belongs to EWS category and that he would fall within the Andhra University local area. In support of the same, he uploaded all the documents. On 22.11.2020, the petitioner downloaded the provisional verification report and found that he was categorized in non-local category, which led to filing of the present Writ Petition. It is not in dispute here that the petitioner was born in Guntur on 6.2.2002 and only for a period of two years, he went outside the state of Andhra Pradesh and studied XI and XII classes in Mandya District of Karnataka State. After completing the same, he came back to Guntur. Having regard to the fact that his entire education, except two years of education, was at Guntur and having regard to the fact that the Aadhar Card shows his address at Guntur, pleads that he should be treated as a local candidate. 3
4. The facts in W.P.No.22741 of 2020, in nutshell, are that the petitioner studied Pre-school to UKG at Priyanka Pre- school, Rajahmundry in Andhra Pradesh during the academic years 2004 to 2007; from first standard to IV class, in Gomathy International School, Nellore, during the academic years 2007 to 2011 and fifth standard in Bens Discovery School, Nellore and further studied VI class to X class in Ratnam English Medium School, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh during the years 2012 to 2017. As petitioner's father, who is a Central Government Employee, was transferred to Mumbai, the petitioner studied XI and XII classes in Mumbai. Soon after completion of XII class, he appeared in National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) in the year 2019-2020, where he was treated as local, but as he could not secure good rank, took long term coaching and appeared for the A.P. UG Medical admissions 2020-2021. The petitioner secured 522 marks out of 720 and he was placed at serial No.2900. On 20.11.2020, the petitioner is said to have downloaded the provisional verification report and found that he was categorized in non-local category, which lead to filing of the present Writ Petition. It is not in dispute here that the petitioner was born in Vijayawada on 22.9.2001 and only for a period of two years, he went outside the Andhra Pradesh State and studied classes XI and XII in Mumbai, Maharashtra. After completing the same, he came back to Nellore. Having regard to the fact that the entire education, 4 except classes XI and XII, was in Andhra Pradesh and having regard to the fact that the Aadhar Card shows his address at Nellore, pleads that he should be treated as a local candidate.
5. The facts in W.P.No.23233 of 2020 are that the petitioner studied I class to III class at Infant Jesus English medium primary school, Rajampet; IV class and V class at Narayana English medium school, Kadapa; VI class at Narayana English medium school, Kadapa; VII class to X class at Akshara Vidyalaya (CBSE) Nellore; and XI and XII classes at Sundeam School (CBSE) Vellore, Tamilnadu. Soon after completion of XII class, he appeared in National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (UG) 2020 (NEET) held on 13.9.2020. The petitioner secured 477 marks out of 720 and he was placed at serial No.10615. The petitioner claims to fall under the local area, namely, Sri Venkateswara University Area, but, however, in the Provisional Merit Position dated 22.11.2020, the petitioner is shown as non-local, which led to filing of the present Writ Petition. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner has studied I class to X class in Andhra Pradesh and only for a period of two years, he went outside the Andhra Pradesh State and studied classes XI and XII in Vellore, Tamilnadu. Having regard to the fact that the entire education, except classes XI and XII, was in Andhra Pradesh, pleads that he should be treated as a local candidate. 5
6. A counter came to be filed by the 2nd and 3rd Respondents disputing the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. It is urged that, as per the Presidential Order issued in G.O. (P) 646, dated 11.07.1979, certain regulations came to be framed by the University. Referring to Rule 3.4.1 of the said Regulation, it is urged that the petitioners failed to fulfil the conditions stipulated therein, since they have not studied for four or seven consecutive years within the local area ending with the academic year in which they appeared or as the case may be, first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination.
7. It is further stated that, even petitioners have not fulfilled the Regulation 3.4.1 (ii) as they have not resided in the State of Andhra Pradesh in preceding two years out of four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year by qualifying examination in any local area of State of Andhra Pradesh. Having regard to the above, it is urged that they cannot be treated as local candidate, more so, in view of the Presidential Order.
8. The point that arises for consideration is, whether the Petitioner is entitled to be treated as a local candidate?
9. Sri P.Veera Reddy, learned senior counsel leading the batch, would submit that a reading of the regulations make it clear that the petitioners in all the cases are to be treated as local candidates. In other words, his plea is that since the 6 petitioners have been residing in the local area since more than 7 years or 10 years, as the case may be, except for a temporary period of two years, when they went out in pursuit of their education or accompanied their parents, who went out due to employment, they should be treated as local candidates. He further pleads that if these petitioners and their parents, who are permanent residents of Guntur/Andhra Pradesh, as the case may be, are to be treated as non-locals, merely because they went out in pursuit of their education or accompanied their parents, who went out due to employment, grave injustice would be caused to them and they cannot be placed on a worst footing than those who born outside the State and studied continuously for four or seven years in the State of Andhra Pradesh. He took us through the provisions of the Regulations issued for admission in MBBS/BDS course, more particularly, Regulation No.3, inter alia, contending that a reading of the same, more particularly, having regard to the fact that they are residents of local area for more than 7 or 10 years, ending with academic year in which they first appeared for relevant qualifying examination, it would demonstrate that they have to be treated as local candidates.
10. Sri Challa Sivasankar, learned counsel appearing for the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.22741 of 2020, adopting the arguments of Sri P.Veera Reddy, would contend that the petitioner in his case was earlier treated as local candidate in 7 the previous year, but, however, in this academic year he is being treated as a non-local candidate, which shows that even authorities are not sure as to who should be treated as local candidates and without knowing the same, they are deciding the fate of the students.
11. Sri D.V.Sasidhar, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in W.P.No.23233 of 2020, while adopting the argument of the learned Senior Counsel, would contend that in view of the judgment of the Apex Court and having regard to the issues raised, the Presidential Order, which forms the basis for issuing these regulations, requires re-consideration by this Court.
12. In so far as the issue as to whether the Presidential Order, which led to issuance of subsequent G.Os., is illegal and incorrect, it is to be noted here, the Writ Petitioner in W.P. No.23233 of 2020 has not challenged the same. Hence, this Court need not go into the said aspect.
13. The only ground urged by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners is "on the ground of residence". As stated earlier, the claim of the petitioners to treat them as local candidates is on the ground of their residence in a local area or in Andhra Pradesh for a period of more than 7 years as stipulated in the Regulations.
8
14. The fact that the Petitioners studied up to X Class in the State of Andhra Pradesh is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that Petitioners have studied XI and XII Class in other States. Such being the position, can the Petitioners be treated as local candidates in terms of the Presidential Order and the regulations made pursuant thereto. To appreciate the same, it would be useful to extract the said Regulations, which are as under:-
"3.4. LOCAL CANDIDATES 3.4.1 A candidate for admission shall be regarded as local candidate in relation to a local area.
i) If he/she has studied in an Educational Institution or Educational Institutions in such local area for a period of not less than 4 consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he/she appeared or as the case may be first appeared in relevant qualifying examination.
(or)
ii) Where during the whole or any part of the four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he/she appeared or as the case may be first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination, he/she has not studied in Educational Institution(s), if he/she had resided in that local area for a period of not less than 4 years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination, in which he/she appeared or as the case may be first appeared.
(or)
iii) Local Status Certificate issued by MRO for claiming as AP local as per Circular Nos.4136/SPF&MC/ 2015-5, dated 08.08.2016, 4136/SPF&MC/2015-13, dated 20.11.2017 & G.O.Ms.No.129, dt: 28-10-2019 of General Administration Dept. 9 3.4.2 A candidate who is not regarded as a local candidate under sub-regulation (3.4.1) above in relation to any local area shall.
i) If he/she has studied in educational institutions in the State for a period of not less than 7 consecutive academic years ending with academic year in which he/she appeared or as the case may be first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination be regarded as local candidate in relation to :
a) Such local area where he/she has studied for the maximum period out of the said period of 7 years.
b) Where the period of his/her study in two or more local areas are equal, such local area where he/she has last studied in such equal period.
(or)
ii) If during the whole or any part of the seven consecutive academic years ending with academic year in which he/she appeared or as the case may be first appeared for relevant qualifying examination, he/she has not studied in the educational institution in any local area, but he/she has resided in the State during the whole of the said period of 7 years be regarded as a local candidate in relation to
a) Such local area where he/she has resided for the maximum period out of the said period of 7 years. (or)
b) Where the period of his/her residence in two or more local areas are equal, such local area where he/she has resided last in such equal period.
3.4.3 The following categories of candidates are eligible under 15% of the available seats, i.e. Un-reserved, in terms of the Presidential order :
(i) All local candidates defined in the Presidential order.
(ii) Candidates who have resided in the State for a total period of ten years excluding periods of study outside the State or either of whose parents have resided in the State for a 10 total period of ten years excluding periods of employment outside the State. (Annexure-III).
(iii) Candidates whoa are children of parents who are in the employment of this State or Central Government, Public Sector Corporation, Local Bodies, Universities and other similar quasi Public Institution within the State; and
(iv) Candidates who are spouses of those in the employment of the State or Central Government Public Sector Corporations, Local Bodies, Universities and educational institutions recognized by the Government or a University or Other competent authority and similar other quasi Government institutions within the State.
N.B. : The Scanned copies of relevant certificates must be uploaded for verification along with online application. In respect of residence certificate, the certificate should be obtained from the Revenue authorities clearly specifying the years."
15. Clause (i) of the 3.4.1 states that, 'a candidate for admission to any course of study shall be regarded as local candidate in relation to a local area - if the student has studied in an educational institution or institutions in such local area for a period of not less than four [04] consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which the candidate appeared or as the case may be, first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination'.
16. Admittedly, this clause may not come to the rescue of the Petitioner, as he never studied for four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in the relevant qualifying examination within the local area. 11
17. Clause 3.4.2 deals with a situation where "a candidate who is not regarded as a local candidate under sub-regulation 3.4.1, if he has studied in educational institution in the state for a period of not less then seven consecutive years ending with the academic year in which she appeared or as the case may be first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination may be regarded as local candidate, in relation to such local area".
18. As seen from the averments made in the affidavits, the petitioners did not study in the State of Andhra Pradesh for a period of seven consecutive years ending with the academic year in which they appeared in the relevant qualifying examination. Therefore, Clause 3.4.2 may also not come to the rescue of the Petitioner.
19. Clause 3.4.1 (ii) deals with a situation where a candidate can be regarded as local candidate, 'where during the whole or any part of the four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or as the case may be first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination, he has not studied in any educational institution, if he had resided in that local area for a period of not less than four years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he appeared'.
12
20. Even this clause may not be of any help to petitioners, since, admittedly, petitioners did not stay in the local area for a period of four years immediately preceding the qualifying exam, as they completed their XI and XII classes by studying in different States.
21. Similarly, Clause 3.4.2 (ii) postulates that, a candidate shall if during the whole or any part of the seven consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he or she appeared or as the case may be, first appeared for relevant qualifying examination has not studied in educational institutions in any local area but has resided in the state during the whole of said seven years be regarded as local candidate.
22. This provision is in slight variation to Clause 3.4.2 (i), wherein, it postulates that, if the student has not studied in any educational institution in the State for a period of not less then seven consecutive academic years ending in the academic year, in which he appeared for relevant qualifying examination, but suffice if he has resided in the State during the whole or any part of seven consecutive academic years before the relevant qualifying examination in the State of Andhra Pradesh, to be treated as a local candidate. But, the petitioners herein have studied in the local area up to X class and thereafter went to a different State.
13
23. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon various judgments of the Apex Court, more particularly, the Division Bench judgment of his Court in Tahsildar, Hyd. Vs.T.Venkata Reddy 1 to show as to what the word 'residence' would mean vis-à-vis the Presidential Order, but, it was a case where the issue before the Court was as to who is a local candidate within the meaning of Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions) Order, 1974. The respondent therein studied within the State of Andhra Pradesh, but in different zones. Under those circumstances, the Court rejected the request of the State confirming the order of the learned Single Judge, but, in the instant case the issue is totally different.
24. The issue identical to the case on hand came up for consideration before the Full Bench of this Court in Bathina Rajya Shilpa and Ors. v. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada and Ors.2, wherein the Court considered the Presidential Order and the G.Os. issued pursuant thereto. The Presidential Order was issued vide G.O.Ms.No.453, dated 3.7.1974, which came into effect from 1.7.1974 providing for equitable opportunities and facilities for the people belonging to different parts of the State, in the matter of admissions to educational Institutions. Subsequently, G.Os. were issued thereunder. It was also a 1 AIR 1976 AP 408 2 AIR 2002 AP 115 14 case where the appellants therein studied from kindergarten to SCC in Guntur District and thereafter studied two year intermediate course at Gujarat. Though the appellant secured 1033 rank, but could not get admission as she was treated as a non-local candidate. Finding fault with the findings given by the learned Single Judge, the appellant contended before the Full Bench that she has to be treated as local candidate in Andhra University area. But, her plea was rejected.
25. It is to be noted that the contents of the Presidential Notification are in pari materia with the Regulations framed by the Dr. N.T.R. University of Health Sciences for admission in MBBS/BDS course. This fact is not disputed by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners. That being so, it would be useful to extract the relevant findings of the Full Bench, which are as under :
"42. On an analysis of the above, it is clear that a candidate for the purpose of admission in any institution shall be regarded as a local candidate in relation to a local area under sub-paragraph (1) of Para 4 if he or she fulfils either Clause (a) or Clause (b) of sub-paragraph (1), Clause (b) is applicable only to candidates who have not studied in any educational institutions but have resided in the local area for a period of not less than four years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he or she appeared or first appeared. Since the petitioner has studied in educational institutions, she doesn't come under that clause.
43. In order to be treated as local candidate in relation to a local area under Clause (a) one must have studied in an 15 educational Institution or educational institutions in the local area for a period of not less than four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he or she first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination.
44. Admittedly, the appellant did not study in any of the local areas in the State for a minimum period of four consecutive academic years ending the academic year in which she appeared the relevant qualifying examination i.e. two year Intermediate course though she happened to study in Guntur from Kindergarten to SSC for more than ten years. She prosecuted her two-year Intermediate course during 1998- 2000 in the State of Gujarat. Since out of the four consecutive academic years ending with the qualifying examination, the petitioner had studied only for two years in Guntur district, she cannot be treated as a local candidate of that area in terms of sub-paragraph (1) of Para 4.
45. However, a candidate who is not regarded as local a candidate under para 4(1) can be treated as a local candidate under sub-paragraph (2) if he/she fulfils either Clause (a) or Clause or Clause (b). Again Clause (b) is applicable only to candidates who have not studied in educational institutions but have resided in the State for a period of not less than seven consecutive academic years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he or she appeared or first appeared. Since the petitioner has studied in educational institutions, she doesn't come under that clause.
46. In order to be treated as local candidate under Clause (a) of sub-paragraph (2) of Paragraph 4 one must have studied in an educational institution or educational institutions in the State for a period of not less than seven consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he or she first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination and such candidate will be regarded as a local candidate in relation to (1) such local area where he has studied for the maximum period out of the said period of seven years or (2) where the periods of his or her study in two or more local areas are equal, such local area where the candidate has studied last in such equal periods. Admittedly, the appellant has not fulfilled 16 this clause also as she had not studied for seven consecutive academic years in the State of Andhra Pradesh ending with the relevant qualifying examination of Intermediate. She had studied only for five years in the State out of the seven consecutive years ending with the qualifying examination and she studied the qualifying examination in Gujarat State. In order to be treated as a local candidate under 4(2), it is essential that she must have studied seven consecutive academic years ending with the relevant qualifying examination in the State."
26. Having regard to the fact that the appellant failed to fulfil the clauses, as she has not studied for 7 consecutive years in the State of Andhra Pradesh ending with relevant qualifying examination of intermediate; though studied for ten years in Guntur, the Full Bench held that the appellant therein could not be treated as a local candidate.
27. Even in the instant case, though the petitioner has studied for 7 consecutive years in the local year or four years, as the case may be, but, did not study in the local area in the State for the period ending in the academic year in which he appeared in the relevant qualifying examination i.e., two years intermediate course. Similarly, clauses 3.4.1 (ii), 3.4.2 (ii) which are in pari materia with 4(1)(b) of the Presidential Order, are applicable only to those candidates who have not studied in educational institutions, but have resided in the State for a period of not less than 7 consecutive academic years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he or she first appeared. Admittedly, the petitioners have studied in 17 educational institutions and cannot claim any benefit under those two clauses as well. Therefore, as observed by the Full Bench, in order to treat a student as a local candidate, one should have studied in educational institutions or institutions in the State for a period not less than 7 consecutive years ending with the academic year in which he or she first appeared for relevant qualifying examination.
28. As the main stress of the argument was with regard to the residence of petitioners for a period of ten years in a local area, thereby claiming the benefit of being a local candidate, but, as stated earlier, a reading of the provisions and the judgment of the Full Bench will make it clear that such a benefit can be claimed if the petitioners have not studied in any educational institutions in any local area, but resided in the State during the whole of the said period of 7 years. But, admittedly, petitioners in all the cases have studied in educational institutions in the local area, and as such cannot claim any relief under the said clauses. It may be true that the interpretation may cause some hardship to those students whose parents were Government employees and forced to go out in pursuit of their employment to different States. Probably for that reason 15% reservation is being provided to non-local candidates and if the petitioners are good, they may qualify and get a seat under non-local candidate category.
18
29. In so far as local status certificate issued by the M.R.O., as stipulated in clause-(iii) of 3.4.1, circulars, dated 8.8.2016, 20.11.2017 and 28.10.2019 were issued by the General Administration Department after the bifurcation of the State into Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. Since most of the employees in Andhra Pradesh were working in Telangana and they were made to come over to Andhra Pradesh due to bifurcation and vice-versa, these circulars were issued to treat them as local candidates in their respective States. Hence, these circulars, in our view, do not come in aid of the petitioners, even if a certificate is obtained from Revenue Official showing the petitioner as local candidate.
30. Finally, the learned Senior Counsel would contend that these petitioners cannot be treated on a worst footing than those students, belonging to different States; coming down to the State of Andhra Pradesh and studying and staying for a period of four years or seven years, as the case may be, before the qualifying examination. The said issue was again answered by the Full Bench at para 48 of the judgment, which is as under :
"48. We do agree that a candidate who is a resident of the State of Andhra Pradesh and who had studied in educational institutions right from the kindergarten to SSC in the State except for the two years could not be treated as a local candidate in relation to any of the local areas whereas it may be possible that a candidate who do not belong to the State of Andhra Pradesh but who had studied 4 consecutive academic years in any local area of the State ending with the academic 19 year in which he appeared or first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination could be regarded as a local candidate though he is not a resident of the State of Andhra Pradesh and studied only for four years in the State. But, having regard to the provisions of the Presidential Order and in the absence of any provision having been made in the Presidential Order governing such situation, no relief can be granted to the petitioner."
31. For the aforesaid reasons, we see no merit in the Writ Petitions and the same are accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs in all the Writ Petitions.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in all the Writ Petitions shall stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR ______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date : 14.12.2020 skmr