IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
Harsh Upadhyaya – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
Writ Petition No.Harsh Upadhyaya of 2025
Decided on : 08-10-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's background and request for tc (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. previous court order on tc issuance (Para 4) |
| 3. legal injunctions against withholding certificates (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. regulations against withholding student certificates (Para 12 , 14) |
ORDER :
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
Heard Sri G. R. S. Akhileswar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Malipeddi Srinivas Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Osmania University appearing on behalf of respondent No.4.
2. The petitioner approached this Court seeking the prayer as under:
“…to issue a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus (i) Declaring the inaction of respondent No.6 in not issuing transfer certificate as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19 and 265 of the Constitution of India, and to consequently direct the respondent to issue the transfer certificate any action taken pursuant thereto and pass such further or other order(s) as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
(ii) and violative of articles 14, 19, 21 and 265 of the Constitution of India and/or pass...”.
3. The case of the petitioner in brief as per the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present writ petition is as under:
The petitioner had studied B.Com in the college of respondent No.6 from the year 2021 to 2024 and paid all the pending dues and completed his course. The total fee for the said course is Rs. 24,000/- per year, out of which an amount of Rs. 14,000/- had been paid by the petitioner and the remaining due amount of Rs.10,000/- had to be paid by the State Government under fees Reimbursement Scheme. It is further the case of the petitioner that due to non-payment of fee Reimbursement amount by the State Government, the respondents withheld Transfer Certificate of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
4. PERUSED THE RECORD
(A) The order of this Court dated 29.08.2025 passed earlier in present W.P. No.25952 of 2025 in favour of the petitioner herein is extracted hereunder
“There shall be interim direction to respondent Nos.2 and 5 to allow the petitioner to participate in the process of certificate verification for TGICET without insisting for production of Transfer Certificate from respondent No.6 college.
However, the Transfer Certificate shall be obtained by the petitioner from respondent No.6 college within 7 days from today, and produce the same before the concerned College, where admission is granted to the petitioner.
List this matter on 12.09.2025”.
(B) The letter vide Lr.No.0508/TGCHE/Refund of Originals/2024, dated 05.08.2024 issued by the Telangana Council of Higher Education, Hyderabad addressed to the Registrars of OU, KU, TU, MGU, SU, PU, JNTU, JNAFAU & TMVV is extracted hereunder:
“Sir,
Sub:- TGCHE Withholding of Original Certificates of the Students – Instructions to the Universities/Colleges- Regarding.
Ref:- This office Lr. No. TGCHE/Fee Reimbursement/2024, dt.23.02.2024
While referring to the subject and reference cited that in continuation of earlier letter, it has come to the notice of the Government that certain private colleges are withholding the original certificates of students on the pretext of not receiving fee reimbursement from the Government
Withholding of original certificates will have significant implications for the students, especially when they need to present these documents to join for higher education, applying or joining for jobs and other purposes
Further, in terms of UGC (Grievance Redressal of students) Regulations 2018, the colleges are barred from withholding or refusing to return any document in the form of certificates of degree, diploma or an
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.