Chinnakotla Sri Krishna Bhargav vs. Government Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to the return of their original certificates, which were submitted in the first round of counselling before the 5th respondent-College. This relief is contingent upon the petitioner complying with Rule 6(q) of the 2007 Rules, as notified by G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 15.07.2019. The petitioner must pay the stipulated course discontinuation fee of Rs.3,00,000/- (for MBBS) and the applicable GST to the 4th respondent-University. The Court directed respondent Nos.4 to 6 to release the certificates upon the petitioner providing proof of such payment. The ratio decidendi is that educational institutions can impose reasonable fees and taxes as per statutory rules for course discontinuation after admissions close, and upon compliance, students are entitled to the return of their documents. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioner sought the return of original certificates submitted to the 5th respondent-College. The petitioner had secured admission in the 5th respondent-College but later obtained a seat in AIMS, Mangalagiri. The State Government, through G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 15.07.2019, amended Rule 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Un-aided Minority Professional Institutions (Regulation of Admissions into Under Graduate Medical and Dental Professional Courses) Rules, 2007. The amended Rule 6(q) stipulated a course discontinuation fee of Rs.3,00,000/- for MBBS and Rs.1,00,000/- for BDS, plus applicable GST, to be paid to the University as a condition for withdrawing from the course after the closure of admissions. The 4th respondent-University confirmed that compliance with this rule would entitle the petitioner to the relief sought.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the return of original certificates upon payment of the course discontinuation fee and applicable GST as stipulated by Rule 6(q) of the 2007 Rules, as amended by G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 15.07.2019? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner implicitly argued for the return of certificates by filing the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner participated in the hearing. Revenue/State's contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent-University submitted that the petitioner is required to pay Rs.3,00,000/- as a condition precedent for claiming the return of original certificates, as per G.O.Ms.No.71. The University also stated that if the petitioner complies with this condition, they are entitled to the relief claimed. No specific arguments were recorded for other respondents.