Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43978 (AP)

Amal Bhumesh Battina, v. The Stated of Andhra Pradesh

WP/36035/2025 · 2025-12-23

Dhiraj Singh Thakur, Ravi Cheemalapati

Special Leave Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010701512025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 36035 of 2025 Bench Sr.No:- SL-1 [3483] Amal Bhumesh Battina ...Petitioner Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Rizwan Ali Shaik Advocates for Respondents : Mrs. T. V. Sridevi, Standing Counsel for Dr.NTR University of Health Sciences, Mr. G. Sai Narayana Rao, Standing Counsel for SAAP CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 26th December 2025 P C : The issues raised in the present petition were also the issues which were raised by the petitioner in W.P.No.32505 of 2025. 2. By virtue of our order, dated 20.11.2025, the petition was dismissed, as it was held that the entire process of admission had since come to a close. An S.L.P. was preferred against the aforementioned order before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which too came to be dismissed, as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. The present petition has been filed primarily on the ground that the stray round for admission to MBBS/BDS courses has been opened yet 2 HCJ & RCJ W.P.No.36035 of 2025 again by the University, and that the case of the petitioner could be considered in the said stray round. 4. However, Mrs. T. V. Sridevi, learned Standing Counsel for the University, as also Mr. G. Sai Narayana Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the SAAP, state that while the stray round has been opened for admissions, the same is confined only to admissions under the NRI quota, to which the petitioner does not at all belong and, therefore, they submit that, having already dismissed the earlier petition, the petitioner cannot be permitted to yet again rake up issues, which have since been given a quietus. 5. We quite agree with the view expressed by the learned counsel for the respondents. 6. We find no merit in the present petition, which is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J kbs 3 HCJ & RCJ W.P.No.36035 of 2025 76 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI W.P. No.36035 of 2025 Dt: 24.12.2025 kbs