Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Putluru Bayapu Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 May, 2025
1
APHC010232442025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3328]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA
PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO: 11722/2025
Between:
1. PUTLURU BAYAPU REDDY, SON OF PAKKIRA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION LECTURER
IN PHYSICS, GOVERNMENT DEGREE COLLEGE
KADAPA, A RESIDENT OF # 1/1241-3,
Y.M. PALLI, NEAR C.P. BROWN LIBRARY,
KADAPA..
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED
BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT
OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE RAYALASEEMA UNIVERSITY, REP.
BY ITS REGISTRAR, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE,
NANDYALA ROAD, PASUPULA, KURNOOL - 518007.
3. THE RAYALASEEMA UNIVERSITY, REP.
BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR,
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, NANDYALA ROAD,
PASUPULA, KURNOOL
518007.
2
...RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. BASHEER AHMED
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION
The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Sri Basheer Ahmed, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Smt. N. Vijaya Shanthi, Learned Standing Counsel for Rayalaseema University.
2. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking following relief:
"It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondents in not to accepting the submission of Thesis by petitioner by condoning the delay of submission of the Thesis and for further process to award the Doctorate in Philosophy (Ph.D) Course purportedly on the Non submitting Thesis in time as wholly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to Principles of Natural Justice besides being violative of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to accept the Thesis submitted by petitioner forthwith by condoning the delay of submission of the Thesis and for further process to award the Doctorate in Philosophy (Ph.D) degree by providing one time opportunity to complete his Course and pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may be deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
3. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has placed reliance on the Order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.13688 of 2024 dated 12.08.2024 (Ex.P.8). On verification of the Order passed by the learned Single judge in W.P.No.13688 of 2024 dated 12.08.2024, it appears 3 that the learned Single Judge has placed reliance on an earlier Order passed by this Court in W.P.No.28977 of 2023 dated 04.04.2024 (Ex.P.7).
4. In this view of the matter this Court is of the view that it would be useful to refer to the Order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.28977 of 2023, since this Order, which has been referred to in the subsequent Writ Petitions, has been relied on for granting relief in the subsequent Writ Petitions.
5. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to extract the relevant portion of the learned Single Judge's Order in W.P.No.28977 of 2023 dated 04.04.2024:
"4. The further case of the petitioners is that though the respondent university has reinitiated the Ph.D. programme and has conducted viva voce to the candidates who have submitted their thesis in 2019, the respondent authorities have orally informed the petitioners that no further steps would be taken in their respective cases for completion of Ph.D. and for submission of doctoral thesis, on the ground of non- payment of requisite fee and non-submission of doctoral thesis in time. The petitioners further submit that the University Grants Commission has neither prescribed any minimum or maximum time limit within which a student has to complete the course or to submit the thesis after appearing for the examination, nor has laid down any guidelines to determine the minimum period required for submission of thesis after research work, but, it is for the university concerned to frame their own statutes, rules and regulations in this regard. The respondent university, in the present case, without considering the factored conditions that ought to be considered in favour of the petitioners, such as disrupted academic and research activities, pandemic conditions, complexity of research topic, scarceness of research material technicalities beyond the control of the petitioners, negligence and mass-miscommunication, delay and laches on the part of the respondents', is not allowing the petitioners to submit doctoral thesis and to attend viva voce, but are threatening the petitioners of cancellation of admission orally Though all the petitioners are ready and willing to pay all the requisite 4 fee for condonation of delay, if any, and are ready to submit their respective doctoral thesis except the 21 st petitioner, in whose case extension of time is required, the respondents are not permitting the petitioners for completing the Ph.D. Course.(emphasis supplied)
5..........................
6...........................
7............................
8............................
9............................
10............................
11. It is also evident from the material available on record that basing on the resolutions of the various committees and approvals of the Executive Committee, the University is continuing the research program and is confined to the resolutions of the EC and the EC has instructed the University to close the research program after completing the pending formalities for the research scholars whose research admissions were in live before 30.04.2024. The only ground on which petitioners' case was rejected is that they have not paid the fees as they are not aware in view of the fact that the last date for payment of fees was uploaded only in the website.
12. In view of the fact that the respondent University has passed a resolution and thereafter issued various circulars for closure of the Ph.D. program before 30.04.2024, instead of going into merits of the case, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners by receiving the payment of the research fee duly condoning the delay as a one time opportunity to the petitioners, within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, the petitioners may be allowed to complete their Ph.D. program in accordance with law."
6. Having regard to these facts, there shall be a direction to the Official Respondents to allow the Writ Petitioner to deposit the required fee within a period of ten (10) days in terms of the Order passed by this Court dated 04.04.2024 in W.P.No.28977 of 2023 and submit thesis within a period of 5 six (6) months thereafter. It is needless to state that the Official Respondents shall adhere to the directions passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.28977 of 2023 dated 04.04.2024.
7. With these observations and directions, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Interim orders granted earlier, if any, shall stand vacated.
______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dated: 02.05.2025 Vns