Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 14212
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J
M OHAMMED ABDUL GAFFOR ALI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
Writ Petition No: 20551/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MAHESWARI ARIKA
For the Respondents: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, NIMMAGADDA VIJAYA SANTHI
The court ruled that the actions preventing the petitioner from completing his Ph.D were illegal, arbitrary, and violated principles of natural justice, thus allowing the petitioner to proceed.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14 and Article 21 - Writ of Mandamus - Respondent's refusal to allow completion of Ph.D - The action of the respondents was declared illegal, arbitrary, and unjust, violating principles of natural justice - One-time opportunity granted to the petitioner to submit thesis and pay fees. (Paras 6, 7, 8)
(B) Educational rights - Respondent University to allow the petitioner to continue studies in accordance with earlier court orders, acknowledging procedural adherence and timelines related to fee payment and thesis submission. (Paras 5, 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner claims his right to complete his Ph.D after not being allowed due to fee payment issues, challenging the respondents' actions as illegal and arbitrary.
Findings of Court:
Directions issued to allow the petitioner to pay fees within 10 days and submit his thesis by 28.02.2026, ensuring compliance with previous court orders.
Issues: Whether the actions of the respondents violated the principles of natural justice and the petitioner's right to pursue education.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that prohibiting the petitioner from completing his Ph.D based on fee non-payment was unjust and not in accordance with legal principles.
Result: Writ Petition allowed, directing compliance with the court's previous orders.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for relief due to fee payment issues. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. reference to previous court orders guiding the decision. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's directive to allow thesis submission. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. final ruling allowing the writ petition. (Para 8) |
ORDER:
Heard Sri Shaik Meeravalli, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Ms.P.Lakshmi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Education and Smt. Nimmagadda Vijaya Shanti, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
2. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking following relief:
“…pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents in not permitting the petitioner to complete the Doctorate in Philosophy (Ph.D) Course purportedly on the grounds of non-payment of course fee/extension fee and/or non submission of DCMS/Thesis in time as wholly illegal, arbitrary, unjust. contrary to Principles of Natural Justice besides being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to complete the Ph.D. Course by condoning the delay for payment fee and by providing one time opportunity to complete his respective Course and to pass…”
3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has placed reliance on the Order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.13688 of 2024 dated 12.08.2024. On a perusal of the Order passed by the learned Single judge in W.P.No.13688 of 2024 dated 12.08.2024, it appears that the learned Single Judge has placed reliance on an earlier Order passed by this Court in W.P.No.28977 of 2023 dated 04.04.2024.
4. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the view that it would be useful to refer to the Order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.28977 of 2023 , since this Order, which has been referred to in the subsequent Writ Petitions, has been relied on for granting relief in the subsequent Writ Petitions.
5. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to extract the relevant portion of the learned Single Judge’s Order in W.P.No.28977 of 2023 dated 04.04.2024:
“11. It is also evident from the material available on record that basing on the resolutions of the various committees and approvals of the Executive Committee, the University is continuing the research program and is confined to the resolutions of the EC and the EC has instructed the University to close the research program after completing the pending formalities for the research scholars whose research admissions were in live before 30.04.2024. The only ground on which petitioners’ case was rejected is that they have not paid the fees as they are not aware in view of the fact that the last date for payment of fees was uploaded only in the website.
12. In view of the fact that the respondent University has passed a resolution and thereafter issued various circulars for closure of the Ph.D. program before 30.04.2024, instead of going into merits of the case, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners by receiving the payment of the research fee duly condoning the delay as a one time opportunity to the petitioners, within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, the petitioners may be allowed to complete their Ph.D.
program in accordance with law.”
6. Having regard to these facts, there shall be a direction to the Official Respondents to allow the Writ Petitioner to deposit the required fee within a period of ten (10) days in terms of the Order passed by this Court dated 04.04.2024 in W.P.No.28977 of 2023 . It is needless to state that the Official Respondents shall adhere to the directions passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.28977 of 2023 dated 04.04.2024.
7. The Respondent University shall permit the present Writ Petitioner to submit his Ph.D thesis wit
