APHC010432592026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 23480 of 2026 Bench Sr.No:- [3584] Shaik Mubeen Sadia Parveen ...Petitioner Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents ********** Reserved for orders on : 20.08.2026 Pronounced on : 15.09.2026 Whether only operative part : of the judgment is pronounced or whether full judgment is pronounced Full CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE LISA GILL SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Present : Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. N. V. Sumanth for M/s Indus Law Firm Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): AGP for Medical, Health & FW Ms. Tata Venkata Sridevi (Standing Counsel for Dr.NTR University of Health Sciences) LISA GILL, CJ. Prayer in this writ petition reads as under: ― ..issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring that Clause 12.2 of the Notification dated 05.08.2026 issued by Respondent No 2 for the Academic Year 2026-27 read with Paragraph/Rule 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions) Order 1974 and Rule 9(1) of the Andhra 2 WP_23480_2026 Pradesh Government Professional Institutions (Regulation of Admissions into Undergraduate Medical and Dental Professional Courses) Rules, 2004, the Andhra Pradesh Unaided Non-Minority Professional Institutions (Regulations of Admissions into Undergraduate Medical and Dental Professional Courses) Rules, 2007 the Andhra Pradesh Unaided Minority Professional Institutions (Regulations of Admissions into Under Graduate Medical and Dental Professional Courses) Rules 2004 as substituted by G O Ms No 80, 81 and 82 HM and FW (C1) Department dated 22.07.2025 and GO Ms No 84, 85 and 86 HM and FW (C1) Department dated 02.07.2026 respectively as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India the principles laid down by the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Meenakshi Malik v University of Delhi (1989) 3 SCC 112 and State of Telangana v Kalluri Naga Narasimha Abhiram (judgment dated 01.09.2025) and the object of the Presidential Order under Article 371D to the extent that the said provisions do not include within the definition of local candidate those students who were compelled to study outside the local area of the State solely on account of the compulsory service posting of a parent who is a civilian employee of the Indi an Air Force and consequently direct that Clause 12.2 of the present Notification read with Rule 4 of the 1974 Order and Rule 9(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Government Professional Institutions Regulation of Admissions into Under graduate Medical and Dental Professional Courses Rules 2004 the Andhra Pradesh Unaided Non-Minority Professional Institutions Regulations of Ad missions into Undergraduate Medical and Dental Professional Courses Rules 2007 the Andhra Pradesh Unaided Minority Professional Institutions Regulations of Admissions into Under Graduate Medical and Dental Professional Courses Rules 2004 as substituted by G.O Ms. No. 80, 81 and 82 HM and FW (C1) Department, dated 22.07.2025 and GO. Ms. No 84, 85 and 86, HM and FW (C1) Department dated 02.07.2026 respectively be read down so as to include such students within the definition of local candidate and further direct respondents to receive process and consider the Petitioner‘s online application Registration ID UG26CQ01011997 by treating her as a local candidate of the Andhra University local area and to include her name in the local merit list for the Competent Authority Quota seats and pass any other order or orders as this Hon‘ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case..‖ 2. Grievance raised in this writ petition by petitioner is that rigid application of four year continuous study rule ignoring service exigencies of petitioner‘s parent is arbitrary and illegal. 3. It is pleaded that petitioner completed her Secondary School Examination (Class X) in 2024 from PM Shri Kendriva Vidyalaya, AFS 3 WP_23480_2026 Begumpet, Hyderabad, Telangana. She thereafter pursued intermediate for academic years 2024-25 and 2025-26 at Sri Chaitanya Junior College, Punadipadu, Kankpadu mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh and took intermediate public examination in May 2026, as well as NEET UG-2026 examination securing a score of 255 (All India Rank 791430). It is further pleaded that petitioner belongs to BC-E (Muslim) category and possesses a valid caste certificate issued by competent authority of State of Andhra Pradesh. 4. Petitioner‘s father is stated to be a civilian employee in Indian Air Force having joined on 28.09.2004. Because of her father‘s continuous posting at AFS, Begumpet, she had to complete her schooling from Class VI to Class X at Kendriya Vidyalaya, AFS Begumpet, Hyderabad. After completing class X, she shifted to Andhra Pradesh for intermediate studies. 5. Petitioner submitted her application for admission in MBBS/BDS courses under competent authority quota for academic year 2026-27 on 10.08.2026. However, she has been treated as a non-local candidate claiming ―APNL with AP Domicile‖ on premise that four consecutive academic years ending with qualifying examination (intermediate) were not entirely spent in a local area of Andhra Pradesh. Aggrieved therefrom, present writ petition has been filed. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner vehemently argued that by strict interpretation, petitioner is permanently excluded from consideration under 4 WP_23480_2026 local quota seats despite her genuine connection with State of Andhra Pradesh. Her father is having domicile of Andhra Pradesh and it is only due to exigency of his services that he was serving at Begumpet, Hyderabad. Reliance was placed by learned counsel for petitioner on judgment of Hon‘ble the Supreme court in Meenakshi Malik v. University of Delhi (1989) 3 SCC 112 and State of Telangana v. Kalluri Naga Narasimha Abhiram 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1880, it was thus prayed that this writ petition be allowed as prayed for. 7. Learned counsel for respondents have opposed this writ petition while submitting that matter is squarely covered in favour of respondents in view of full Bench judgment of combined High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Bathina Rajya Shilpa v. NTR University of Health Sciences, AIR 2002 AP 115 as well as Division Bench judgment of this High Court in Dunna Kalyani v. State of Andhra Pradesh1 and SK Khamruddin and Ors., v. State of Andhra Pradesh 2 , against order dated 13.08.2025 passed in which SLP was dismissed on 01.09.2025. Dismissal of writ petition was thus prayed for. 8. We heard learned counsel for parties and have carefully gone through the file. 9. At the very outset, it is relevant to refer to Presidential Order, 1974 whereby erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh was divided into various local 1 Decided on 29.08.2024 in W.P. No.19115 of 2024 2 Decided on 13.08.2025 in W.P. No.19579 of 2025 & Batch 5 WP_23480_2026 areas and 85% of seats in educational institutions and public employment at certain levels were reserved for local candidates of said ―local areas‖. As per para 2(c), ‗local candidate‘ in relation to any local area means a candidate who qualifies under paragraph 4 of this Order as a local candidate in relation to such local area. 10. Para 4 of this Order reads as under: ―4. Local candidates: (1) a candidate for admission to any course of study shall be regarded as a local candidate in relation to a local area (a) if he has studied in an educational institution or educational institutions in such local area for a period of not less than four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case maybe, first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination; or (b) where during the whole of any part of the four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination, he has not studied in any educational institution, if he has resided in that local area for a period of not less than four years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he appeared or as the case may be first appeared, [*** (2)A candidate for admission to any course of study who is not regarded as a local candidate under-sub-paragraph(1) in relation to any local area shall— (a) if he has studied in educational institutions in the State for a period of not less than seven consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination, be regarded as a local candidate in relation to i) Such local area where he has studied for the maximum period out of the said period of seven years: or ii) Where the periods of his study in two or more local areas are equal, such local area where he has studied last in such equal periods: or b) If, during the whole or any part of the seven consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appear for the examination, he has not studied in the educational institution in any local area, but has resided in the state during the whole of the said period of seven years, be regarded as a local candidate in relation to i) Such local area where he has resided for the maximum period out of the said period of seven years, or 6 WP_23480_2026 ii) Where the period of *his residence in two or more local areas are equal, such local area where he has resided last in such equal periods‖.] Explanation for the purpose of this paragraph i) ―Educational institution means a University or any educational institution means a University or any educational institution recognized by the State Government a University or other Competent authority; ii) ―Relevant qualifying examination ― in relation to admission to any course of study, means the examination, a pass in which is the minimum educational qualification for admission to such course of study: ΐΐ [(iii) In reckoning the consecutive academic years during which a candidate has studied,- a) any period of interruption of his study by reason of his failure to pass any examination; and b) any period of his study in state – wide University or a statewide educational institution, shall be disregarded] @(iv) the question whether any candidate for admission to any course of study has resided in any local area shall be determined with reference to the places where the candidate actually resided and not with reference to the residence of his parent or other guardian.] 11. Full Bench of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Bathina Rajya Shilpa (supra), while considering this issue upheld rejection of request of one of the candidates to be treated as local candidate on the ground that she had studied from kindergarten to class X in Guntur and had undertaken her intermediate in the State of Gujarat only because of her mother, who was working in State Bank of India, being transferred to said State. Her claim that she should be treated as local candidate for Andhra University area was rejected. It was held that once criteria laid down in para 4 of Presidential Order is not fulfilled, benefit of being treated as a local candidate cannot be afforded. 12. A Division Bench of this High Court in SK Khamruddin and Ors. (supra) dealt with identical issues as have been raised in present writ petition. Petitioners in said batch matters were students who pursued a major part of 7 WP_23480_2026 school education in State of Andhra Pradesh but had pursued their +2 education (intermediate) outside the State. It was contended by petitioners therein that applicable regulations should be read down and interpreted in accordance with judgment of a Division Bench of erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in case of Tahsildar, Hyderabad vs. T. Venkata Reddy AIR 1976 AP 408 and High Court of Telangana in Prashansa Rathod and Ors., vs. State of Telangana 2023 (5) ALT 419. 13. Stand taken by State was that judgment of Division Bench of erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in case of Tahsildar, Hyderabad vs. T. Venkata Reddy (supra) had been superseded by judgment of full bench of erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Bathina Rajya Shilpa (supra) and that regulation 7.3 of notification dated 22.07.2025, which defines ―local candidates‖, is a reiteration of Rule 4 of Presidential Order, 1974, which has been upheld. Provisions of Presidential Order, 1974 were never under challenge before Telangana High Court and it was only Rule 3(III)(b) of Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS and BDS Courses) Rules, 2017, which was being considered in said case as well as in the earlier matter of Prashansa Rathod and Ors. (supra). 14. Division Bench, while taking in consideration entire facts and circumstances in the case of SK Khamruddin and Ors. (supra), dismissed all the writ petitions while holding as under: 8 WP_23480_2026 ―14. Regulation 7.3, which is under challenge, is essentially a reiteration of Rule 4 of the Presidential Order. 15. In the case of Tahsildar, Hyderabad vs. T. Venkata Reddy, a Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh had taken the view that the residence of the parent should be treated as the residence of the student. However, explanation (iv) to Rule 4(2)(b), which prescribes residence as one of the qualifying criteria, reads as follows; ―(iv) The question whether any candidate for admission to any course of study has resided in any local area shall be determined with reference to the places where the candidate actually resided and not with reference to the residence of his parent or other guardian.‖ This explanation precludes the consideration of the residence of the parents as the residence of the student. 16. In Bathina Rajya Shilpa and etc.etc., vs. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada and Ors., The petitioners were the persons, who had studied for a major part of their school education, in the State of Andhra Pradesh, but had pursued their + 2 education outside the State of Andhra Pradesh. They had approached the Court on the ground that they should also be treated as local candidates as they had pursued a large part of their education in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Full Bench rejected this contention. The relevant paragraphs are extracted below: 42. On an analysis of the above, it is clear that a candidate for the purpose of admission in any institution shall be regarded as a local candidate in relation to a local area under sub- paragraph (1) of Para 4 if he or she fulfils either clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-paragraph (1), Clause (b) is applicable only to candidates who have not studied in any educational institutions but have resided in the local area for a period of not less than four years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he or she appeared or first appeared. Since the petitioner has studied in educational institutions, she doesn't come under that clause. 43. In order to be treated as local candidate in relation to a local area under clause (a) one must have studied in an educational institution or educational institutions in the local area for a period of not less than four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he or she first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination. 45. However, a candidate who is not regarded asa local candidate under para 4(1) can be treated as a local candidate under sub-paragraph (2) if he/she fulfils either Clause (a) or Clause or Clause (b). Again clause (b) is applicable only to candidates who have not studied in educational institutions but have resided in the State for a period of not less than seven consecutive academic years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which 9 WP_23480_2026 he or he appeared or first appeared. Since the petitioner has studied in educational institutions, she doesn't come under that clause. 46. In order to be treated as local candidate under clause (a) of sub-paragraph (2) of Paragraph 4 one must have studied in an educational institution or educational institutions in the State for a period of not less than seven consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he or she first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination and such candidate will be regarded as a local candidate in relation to (1) such local area where he has studied for the maximum period out of the said period of seven years or (2) where the periods of his or her study in two or more local areas are equal, such local area where the candidate has studied last in such equal periods. Admittedly, the appellant has not fulfilled this clause also as she had not studied for seven consecutive academic years in the State of Andhra Pradesh ending with the relevant qualifying examination of Intermediate. She had studied only for five years in the State out of the seven consecutive years ending with the qualifying examination and she studied the qualifying examination in Gujarat State. In order to be treated as a local candidate under 4(2), it is essential that she must have studied seven consecutive academic years ending with the relevant qualifying examination in the State. 47. Therefore, it is clear that the petitioner has not fulfilled the criteria laid down under para 4 of the Presidential Order in order to be treated as a local candidate either in terms of para 4(1) or para 4(2). True, the petitioner did study in the State of Andhra Pradesh for a period of more ten years right from kindergarten to SSC and in spite of that she could not be treated as a local candidate in relation to any of the local areas of the State. Had she studied the qualifying examination in the State, the matter would have been different. 48. We do agree that a candidate who is a resident of the State of Andhra Pradesh and who had studied in educational institutions right from the kindergarten to SSC in the State except for the two years could hot be treated as a local candidate in relation to any of the local areas whereas it may be possible that a candidate who do not belong to the State of Andhra Pradesh but who had studied 4 consecutive academic years in any local area of the State ending with the academic year in which he appeared or first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination could be regarded as a local candidate though he is not a resident of the State of Andhra Pradesh and studied only for four years in the State. But, having regard to the provisions of the Presidential Order and in the absence of any provision having been made in the Presidential Order governing such situation, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. 10 WP_23480_2026 17. In Prashansa Rathod and Ors., vs. State of Telangana, the Division Bench of the Hon‘ble High Court for the State of Telangana took the view that the judgment of the Full Bench in Bathina Rajya Shilpa and etc.etc., vs. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada and Ors., was not applicable as the 2017 Telangana Rules had been formulated after the judgment of the Full Bench in Bathina Rajya Shilpa and etc.etc., vs. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada and Ors.With utmost respect, we cannot subscribe to this view. In any event, the language in Regulation 7.3 is, in our opinion, a reiteration of Rule 4 of the Presidential Order, 1974, which has been interpreted, in the above manner, by the Full Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh.We are bound by the observations and ratio laid down by the Full Bench above. 18. Accordingly, we find no merit in the present set of writ petitions and they are dismissed.There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.‖ 15. This decision has admittedly been upheld by Hon‘ble Supreme Court vide decision dated 01.09.2025 in SLP (C) Dairy No.46376 of 2025. 16. It is reiterated that in the case of SK Khamruddin and Ors. (supra), petitioners therein had challenged notification dated 22.07.2025 regarding the Andhra Pradesh Unaided Non-Minority Professional Institutions (Regulations of Admissions into Undergraduate Medical and Dental Professional Courses) Rules, 2007, and prospectus issued in accordance thereof. The amendments carried out in the said Rules for taking up admission for academic year 2025- 26 read as under: ― AMENDMENTS In the said rules, In rule 9(1) For item (a), the following shall be substituted namely,- a) Admission to 85% of the seats in each course in non-state wide Institutions shall be reserved for the local candidates of Andhra Pradesh and the remaining 15% of the seats shall be un-reserved seats for the candidates of local/non local areas to be filled as per the following Explanation. Explanation for purpose of these rules,- 11 WP_23480_2026 (i) Local Areas means: (a) Andhra University Area: The part of the State comprising the erstwhile districts of Srikakulam, Vizianagaram, Visakhapatnam, East Godavari, West Godavari, Krishna, Guntur and Prakasam shall be regarded as the Local Area for the purpose of admission to the Andhra Pradesh Un-aided Minority Professional Institutions i.e., Undergraduate Medical and Dental Professional courses and to any other educational institutions (other than a state-wide university or state-wide educational institution) which is subject to the control of the State Government and is situated in that part. (b) Sri Venkateswara University Area: The part of the State comprising the erstwhile districts of Anantapur, Kurnool, Chittoor, Cuddapah and Nellore shall be regarded as the Local Area for the purpose of admission to the Andhra Pradesh Un-aided Minority Professional Institutions i.e Undergraduate Medical and Dental Professional courses and to any other educational institutions (other than a state-wide university or state-wide educational institution) which is subject to the control of the State Government and is situated in that part. (ii) The Local Candidate means: (A) A candidate for admission shall be regarded as a local candidate in relation to a local area. - (a) If he/she has studied in educational Institution or educational Institutions in such local area for a period of not less than four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he/she appeared or as the case may be, first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination, or (b) Where, during the whole or any part of the four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he/she appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination, he/she has not studied in any educational Institutions, if he/she has resided in that local area for a period of not less than four years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he/she appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared. (B) A candidate for admission to the Course who is not regarded as local candidate under clause (A) in relation to any local area shall,- (a) If he/she has studied in educational Institutions in the State for a period of not less than seven consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he/she appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination be regarded as a local candidate in relation to, - (i) Such local area where he/she has studied for the maximum period out of said period of seven years, or (ii) Where the period of his/her study in two local areas are equal, such local area, where he/she has studied last in such equal period, or (b) If, during the whole or any part of seven consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he/she appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination, he/she has not studied in the educational Institutions in any local area, but has resided in the State during the whole of the said period of seven years, be regarded as a local candidate in relation to, - (i) Such local area where he/she has resided for the maximum period out of the said period of seven years, or (ii) Where the periods of his/her residence in two local areas are equal, such local area where he/she has resided last in such equal periods. (C) The following categories of candidates are eligible to apply for admission to the remaining 15% of un-reserved seats: i. All the candidates eligible to be declared as local candidates of two local areas of State of Andhra Pradesh. ii. Candidates who have resided in the State of Andhra Pradesh for a total period of 10 years excluding periods of study outside the State or either of whose parents 12 WP_23480_2026 have resided in the State of Andhra Pradesh for a total period of ten years excluding period of employment outside the State. iii. Candidates who are children of parents who are in employment of the State of Andhra Pradesh or Central Government, Public Sector Corporations, Local Bodies, Universities and Educational Institutions other similar quasi Public Institutions within the State of Andhra Pradesh. iv. Candidates who are spouses of those in the employment of the State of Andhra Pradesh or Central Government, public sector corporations, Local Bodies, Universities and Educational Institutions recognized by the Government or University or other Competent Authority and similar quasi Government Institutions within the State of Andhra Pradesh.‖ 17. Vide notification dated 02.07.2026, the said interim arrangements as per G.O. dated 22.07.2025 were directed to be continued for the purpose of academic year 2026-27. Accordingly, prospectus was issued by respondent University which is attached with writ petition as annexure-P3. 18. Learned counsel for petitioner was unable to point out any distinction in present case which would persuade us to take a view different from one already taken by a Coordinate Bench after considering similar arguments addressed before it. 19. Reliance by learned counsel for petitioner on State of Telangana v. Kalluri Naga Narasimha Abhiram (supra) is misplaced, because proviso to Rule 3 in Telangana Medical & Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017, specifically provides that a candidate, who studies outside Telangana for any period during the requisite four consecutive academic years ending with academic year in which he appeared, or as the case may be, first appeared in relevant qualifying examination, will be eligible to be considered as local candidate if they fall under any of the categories as under: 13 WP_23480_2026 ―.. 3. Children of defence personnel/ex-servicemen/Central Armed Police Force service who at the time of joining service, have declared their hometown to be in the State of Telangana and who have served or are serving outside Telangana corresponding to the candidate's year/s of study outside Telangana. 4 . Children of employees of a Corporation/Agency/ Instrumentality under Government of Telangana, liable to be transferred anywhere in India as per the terms and conditions of his/her employment, who have served or are serving outside Telangana corresponding to the candidate's year/s of study outside Telangana II. Subject to the candidate submitting Certificate of employment from the competent authority for the candidate's father/mother's service outside the State for the period corresponding to the candidate's year/s of study outside Telangana.‖ 20. In above said case, Division Bench of Telangana High Court has specifically taken note of statement made by learned Advocate General of Telangana that petitioner in one of the said writ petitions shall be treated as a ‗local candidate‘, moreover, State of Telangana is not governed by the Presidential Order, 1974, as is the case in present situation. It is due to this reason that there cannot be a reading down of the rule as had been urged during the course of arguments in terms of judgment of Hon‘ble the Supreme Court in Vansh S/o Prakash Dolas v. the Ministry of Education and Ors., (2024) 20 SCC 306. 21. Learned counsel for petitioner was unable to point out any such ground which calls for interference in this matter and especially in view of full Bench judgment of this Court in Bathina Rajya Shilpa (Supra) and division Bench judgments in Dunna Kalyani (supra) and SK Khamruddin and Ors., (supra). No other argument was addressed. 14 WP_23480_2026 22. Keeping in view facts and circumstances as above, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. LISA GILL, CJ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J akn Uploaded on : 17.09.2026 Whether the order is Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether the order is Reportable : Yes/No 15 WP_23480_2026 HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN W.P. No.23480 of 2026 Dt: 15.09.2026 akn