Syed Imtiyaz Pasha Qadri v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
WP/2467/2017 · 2025-07-24
Maheswara Rao Kuncheam
Original Suitbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 36222 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 36222 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
APHC010590402017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 2467 OF 2017 Between:
1. Syed Imtiyaz Pasha Qadri, S/o Syed Iqbal Basha, Aged 51 years, H.N0.49/106, Ravinda Nagar , Kadapa ,AP. P1N:516003. 2. K.C.Ataullah Khan, S/o.K.C.Akbar Sha Khan, aged 45 years, Panthalayan, Koyilandi Post, Kozhi kode, Kerala State, PIN:673305. 3. Syed Muneer Mohiuddin, S/o Syed Ghouse Mohiuddin, Aged 59 years, H.N0.2/101-2, Singamala Street, Chitvel (Post), Kadapa, District, AP. PIN:516104. 4. K.Imtiaz, S/o K. Abdul Wahab, aged 39 years, 1-1.N0.8-282, Ibrahm Khan Street, Mundi Bazar, Kadiri, Ananthapuram. District, AP. PIN:515591. 5. S. Haseena Begum, W/o.S.Abdul Sattar, aged 50 years, Q.N0.13, Prakasam Nagar, S.V.U. Campus, Tirupati, Chittor. Dist AP. PIN:517502. 6. R. Syed Rahamthulla, S/0 R. S. Mahaboob Bashaohiuddin aged 47 years, H.N0.8-95, Venu Gopala Swami Street, Palamaner, Chittor. District, AP. PIN:517408 ...Petitioners AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Finance Department Secretariat Office , Amaravathi, AP
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Higher Education, A.P. 4th block ,l't floor , room no :268, Secretariat Office , Amaravathi, A.P
2
3. University Grants Commission UGC, Rep by its Secretary Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002
4. Sri Venkateswara University, Rep by its Registrar Tirupathi-517502, AP
5. High PoWer Committee, Represented by its Chairman Flat no: 102, Jaya Residency 11-4-646,D- 1/B, A.0 Guards Hyderabad-500004 ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in issuing G.O.M.S No: 201, Finance (HR.I. Plg.
Policy) Department Dated: 19.10.2016 as illegal, arbitrary, capricious, irrational apart from being violative of Art.14 of Constitution of India and the University Grants commission (UGC) Act, 1956, A.P. Universities Act, 1991 and also other respective Universities Act and consequently set aside the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioners: KASA JAGANMOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: BUTTA VIJAYA BHASKAR ( SC FOR SRI VENKATESWARA UNIVERSITY Counsel for the Respondents: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION (AP) Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP) The Court made the following order:
3
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.2467 of 2017 ORDER: The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking the following main relief:
“to issue writ, order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in issuing G.O.M.S No: 201, Finance (HR.I. Plg. Policy) Department Dated: 19.10.2016 as illegal, arbitrary, capricious, irrational apart from being violative of Art.14 of Constitution of India and the University Grants Commission (UGC) Act, 1956, A.P. Universities Act, 1991 and also other respective Universities Act and consequently set aside the same and pass …..”
2. When the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel Sri C.Narendra, representing Sri Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Assistant Government Pleader for higher education and Ms.Nimmagadda Vijayasanthi, learned Standing Counsel for 4th respondent University jointly submitted that in view of subsequent events in the lis, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for further adjudication. 3. Recording the submission made by both the counsel, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Date: 25.07.2025 Rns
4
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
WRIT PETITION No.2467 of 2017
Date:25.07.2025 Rns