APHC010286372023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION N BETWEEN: M/s Sagi Rama Krishnam Raju Engineering College, State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A KRISHNAM RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P VIJAY KUMAR 2. GP FOR HIGHER 3. VIJAY KUMAR 4. THOTA SUNEETHA 5. UMADEVI MANCHALA The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No: 15428/2023 M/s Sagi Rama Krishnam Raju Engineering College, ...Petitioner AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...Respondent(s) Counsel for the Petitioner: A KRISHNAM RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): P VIJAY KUMAR GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION THOTA SUNEETHA UMADEVI MANCHALA The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3330] MONDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO ...Petitioner ...Respondent(s) 2 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief/s: …. Pleased to issue order, writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus: a. Declare the action of the Respondent No.2 in proceeding with the inquiry vis a vis the petitioner without verifying the locus of the Respondent No.3 as being arbitrary and illegal and violative of Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh’s order dated 01.10.2021 in W.P. No.11013 of 2021. b. Direct the Respondent No.2 to conduct enquiry on the “locus” of the respondent No.3 before proceeding to conduct inquiry vis a vis the Petitioner and pass such other order or orders….. 2. The 3rd respondent in the present Writ Petition filed Writ Petition No.11013 of 2021 for the mandamus to declare the action of the AICTE in not conducting proper enquiry and in not taking appropriate action on the representation dated 10.04.2021 submitted by the 3rd respondent in the Writ Petition, as highly illegal, arbitrary and consequently prayed to direct the AICTE to 3 take immediate and appropriate action on the representation submitted by the petitioner. 3. The said Writ petition filed by the 3rd respondent was disposed of vide order dated 01.10.2021, “directing the AICTE to consider at first locus standi of the 3rd respondent herein to make complaint against 2nd respondent by affording an opportunity of hearing to both parties and by considering the relevant rules and regulations and if 1st respondent is satisfied with the complaint petition, then it may conduct enquiry by following due process of law”. The authority under AICTE Act held that the complaint is maintainable against the petitioner in the present Writ Petition on the complaint filed by the 3rd respondent having locus to file the complaint. 4. While so, the petitioner-institution herein filed the present Writ Petition on the ground that without deciding the locus of the 3rd respondent herein, the respondents conducted the enquiry, which is unsustainable and it is contrary to directive in W.P. No.11013 of 2021. Hence, sought a direction to the respondents not to proceed with the enquiry till issue of locus stand of the 3rd respondent herein. 4 5. This Court vide order dated 06.07.2023 stayed the enquiry being conducted by the 2nd respondent herein. 6. Aggrieved by the order dated 06.07.2023, the 3rd respondent herein, filed intra court appeal in W.A. No. 1313 of 2023 and the said Writ Appeal was disposed of observing that Proceedings before the learned Single Judge would not prevent the AICTE to determine the locus standi of the appellant i.e. 3rd respondent to file the complaint before the AICTE. 7. Basing upon the orders of this Court in W.A. No.1313 of 2023, the AICTE has declared that the 3rd respondent is having the locus to file the complaint. Hence, both the learned counsels for the Petitioner and Respondents conjointly represented that the present Writ Petition rendered infructuous, as it was held that the 3rd respondent is having locus to file complaint against the petitioner-institution. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 17.02.2025 Harin 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO 171 W.P.No. 15428 OF 2023 Date: 17-02-2025 Harin