IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION NO: 5796/2026 Between: 1. HARSHA PANDRANGI, S/O P.K.D.PRASAD, AGE29 YRS, OCCUNEMPLOYED R/O 8-42, NEAR SYAMALAMBA TEMPLE, KAIKALURU, ANDHRA PRADESH. 521333 ...PETITIONER AND 1. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, RAJPATH AREA, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI, DELHI 110001 2. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ANIMAL HUSBANDRYDEPARTMENT, 4TH BLOCK, VELAGAPUDI,GUNTUR DISTRICT, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH, 522237 3. 3. MINISTRY OF FISHERIES, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND DAIRYING KRISHI BHAWAN, DR RAJENDRA PRASAD RD, RAJPATH AREA, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI, DELHI 110001. 4. VETERINARY COUNCIL OF INDIA, A WING, 2ND FLOOR, AUGUST KRANTI BHAWANI, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI- 110066. 5. 5. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE VETERINARY COUNCIL, THROUGH ITS REGISTER, NEAR GOVERNMENT PRINTING PRESS, MUTHYALAMPADU, VIJAYAWADA - 520011, ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 topleased to pass an order or orders or writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 4th and 5th respondents by not considering the representation of petitioner dt. 17.12.2025 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the 4th and 5th respondent forthwith to reinstate the registration by considering the petitioner’s representation dt. 17.12.2025 pending disposal of the Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GEETHA MADHURI N S Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Y V ANIL KUMAR (Central Government Counsel) The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION NO.5796 of 2026 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material available on record. 2. The petitioner completed five years Veterinary course from “the Saint Petersburg State Academy of Veterinary Medicine” which is a Veterinary college/Academy being run by the Russian Ministry of Agriculture, Russia. In the year 2020, when the petitioner was pursuing the Veterinary course, the Ministry of Agriculture, Russia upgraded the entire educational system and Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education as Saint Petersburg State Academy of Veterinary Medicine was given a rank of a university and renamed as Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education. 3. The petitioner completed Veterinary course in the year 2021 and he was awarded the Doctor of Veterinary Medicine with Protocol No.357 dated 28.06.2021 by the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation, Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education “Saint Petersburg State University of Veterinary Medicine”. To start his Veterinary practice, the petitioner registered in the rolls of the 5th respondent i.e., Andhra Pradesh State Veterinary Council vide registration No. APSVC/7506/2021. After the registration, he started practicing as a junior doctor at a clinic. 4 4. At that juncture, the petitioner came to know that his registration No. vide APSVC/7506/2021 with the 5threspondent was deleted from the AP State Veterinary Council’s Practitioner Register. When he approached the office of the 5th respondent, he came to know that as per the orders received from the 4th respondent i.e., Veterinary Council of India, dated 28.10.2024, his name was deleted from the register. It is informed to the petitioner that the reason for deletion of his name was because the degree awarded to him was from the Saint Petersburg State University of Veterinary Medicine which was not listed in the SECOND SCHEDULE of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984. 5. Petitioner made a representation to the 4th and 5th respondents on 17.12.2025, explaining and requesting them to consider the representation and revoke the letter dated 28.10.2024, issued by the 5th respondent and reinstate the registration to enable him to continue his practice. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the said representation dated 17.12.2025, both “Saint Petersburg State Academy of Veterinary Medicine” and “Saint Petersburg State University of Veterinary Medicine” are one and the same. The Ministry of Agriculture of Russian Federation has upgraded the Academy/college and given a rank of the University and as such both are one and the same. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that for the reasons best known to the respondent Nos.4 and 5, they are not taking any 5 action on the representation dated 17.12.2025, submitted by the petitioner. The learned counsel further contends that a similar case was filed in the High Court of Bombay in W.P.No.9051 of 2023, passed an interim order dated 03.04.2023, the Court directed the Veterinary Council not to strike off the name of the petitioner therein, from their register. He further contends that a similar writ petition was filed in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.22848 of 2025. In the said case also an interim order was passed on 03.09.2025, directing the Veterinary Council to examine whether “Saint Petersburg State Academy of Veterinary Medicine” and “Saint Petersburg State University of Veterinary Medicine” are one and the same and on confirmation directed to take an appropriate action. 8. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 27.11.2025 in W.P.No.3052 of 2023, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. While disposing of the said writ petition, this Court directed the petitioner therein, to produce relevant material with regard to change of academy to that of Saint Petersburg University before the 2nd respondent, within a period of six (06) weeks and thereafter the 2nd respondent is directed to consider and pass an appropriate order within a period of eight (08) weeks, after providing an opportunity to the petitioner before taking any decision. 9. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel on both sides and on perusal of the material available on record, it appears that, only on the ground that the Saint Petersburg University of Veterinary Medicine, 6 Saint Petersburg, Russia, qualification is not a recognized Veterinary qualification, since the same is not represented in the SECOND SCHEDULE of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984, respondent Nos.4 and 5 decided to delete the name of the petitioner from the AP State Veterinary Council’s Practitioner Register vide proceedings dated 28.10.2024 of the 5th respondent, but the case of the petitioner is that the “Saint Petersburg State Academy of Veterinary Medicine” is upgraded as University in the name and style as “Saint Petersburg State University of Veterinary Medicine”. As both are one and the same, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that 4th and 5th respondents committed error in issuing proceedings dated 28.10.2024, in deleting the name of the petitioner from the roles of the 5th respondent's Practitioner Register. 10. Taking into consideration of the orders passed by the various High Courts on the same issue and the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 17.12.2025, is pending with the respondent Nos.4 and 5 till now, in our considered view, it is appropriate and desirable to direct the respondent Nos.4 and 5 to dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner, within a reasonable period to meet the interest of justice. 11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: i). Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.12.2025 and pass 7 an appropriate order within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. ii). If the respondent Nos.4 and 5 intends to hear the learned counsel for the petitioner before taking any decision, they are at liberty to provide an opportunity to the petitioner for personal hearing. 12. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND Date:01.04.2026 SA 8 220 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION NO.5796 of 2026 Dt.01.04.2026 SA