Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 52633 (AP)

KUM VYDADI SRI VIJAYA DEVI PRASANNA v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/35603/2025 · 2025-12-19

Challa Gunaranjan, Dhiraj Singh Thakur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010694762025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 35603 of 2025 Bench Sr.No:-4 [0] Kum Vydadi Sri Vijaya Devi Prasanna ...Petitioner Vs. The State of AP and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Petitioner : Mrs. Popuri Lakshmi Priyanvita representing Mr. S M Subhan Advocate for Respondents : GP for Medical, Health & FW for R1, Mr. Upender representing Mrs. T V Sridevi (Standing Counsel) for R.2 & R3. CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 20th December 2025 P C : 1. By virtue of the order, dated 30.10.2025, this Court had allowed the petition filed by the petitioner bearing W.P.No.29683 of 2025 and directed the respondents to consider her case for admission to all the colleges in the third phase subject to her fulfilling the other eligibility conditions as also her merit in accordance with the regulations. It appears that the petitioner could not participate in the third phase of counseling even when an opportunity was given to the petitioner on account of 2 HCJ & CGR, J WP_35603_2025 her personal difficulty which is stated to be the indisposition of the grandmother of the petitioner who is stated to have been hospitalized. In the meantime, the stray vacancy round is also over and today is the last date for joining of those students who had participated in the stray vacancy round. 2. We find no reason to interfere in the process of admission undertaken by the respondent University as this Court finds no reason to grant indulgence to the petitioner for a second time. Nevertheless, considering the fact that the admissions in the medical courses are time bound, any further direction to consider the petitioner would seriously affect the academic schedule. Be that as it may, we find no reason to grant relief to the petitioner. 3. The petition is found to be without merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J Vjl