Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(TEL) 23027
HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
T. VINOD KUMAR, J
Shatagopam Tanuj – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP/17493/2024
Educational institutions cannot withhold original certificates from students for non-payment of fees, as mandated by UGC guidelines.
Headnote:(A) UGC Guidelines - Withholding of original certificates by educational institutions - The petitioner sought return of original certificates withheld by the college upon discontinuation of studies, claiming such action was illegal and arbitrary - The Court noted that the certificates were eventually returned, addressing the grievance - Instances of withholding certificates were highlighted as a recurring issue despite authoritative judgments. (Paras 3, 8, 10)
(B) Legal Principles - Educational institutions cannot withhold original certificates for non-payment of fees and must follow UGC guidelines, which mandate action against such practices. (Paras 9, 10)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed a Writ Petition against the withholding of original certificates by the 3rd respondent-College after discontinuing studies, asserting that the action was contrary to UGC guidelines. (Paras 2, 3)
Findings of Court:
The original certificates were returned to the petitioner during the hearing, resolving the grievance. (Paras 8, 12)
Issues: The main issue was the legality of withholding original certificates by educational institutions upon a student’s discontinuation of studies. (Paras 3, 10)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that colleges cannot withhold certificates and must adhere to UGC guidelines, highlighting the need for institutional accountability. (Paras 10, 11)
Result: Writ Petition closed as the grievance was resolved.
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Higher Education appearing for respondent No.1, Sri Mohd. Abdul Quddus appearing for respondent No.2, Sri Patil Shankar Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3, and perused the record.
2. The petitioner in the present Writ Petition is aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents against the action of the 3 rd respondent in withholding his original certificates viz., i) 10 th Class Marks Memo, ii) Intermediate marks memo, iii) transfer certificates of intermediate, iv) study & conduct certificates of intermediate, and v) TS EAMCET-2023 Rank Card, in spite of the petitioner discontinuing his studies from the 3 rd respondent-College, as being illegal and arbitrary, and thus, seeks for a direction for return of originals submitted by him at the time of joining into the 3 rd respondent-College.
3. It is the further case of the petitioner that in spite of the petitioner approaching the 3 rd respondent-College seeking for return of the original certificates, the same are not being returned to him, claiming that he is required to pay the entire fee amount, which action of the 3 rd respondent is contrary to the UGC guidelines and also the decisions of this Court in Ms. Shanti Shriram v. The State of Telangana 1 , D. Vaishnavi v. The State of Telangana 2 and a decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Mohd. Abdul Mannan v. The State of Telangana 3 .
4. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Higher Education and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2 nd respondent while fairly submitting that the issue is no longer res-Integra, would submit that since, the petitioner had obtained admission into the 3 rd respondent-College, certificates are held by the 3 rd respondent itself and the fact of the 3 rd respondent not returning the certificates to the petitioner on discontinuing his studies has not been brought to the notice of the said respondents.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 3 rd respondent submits that the petitioner on discontinuing the studies did not approach the 3 rd respondent seeking return of original certificates and has directly approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition claiming that the 3 rd respondent is not returning the certificates, in spite of a request for return of certificates being made.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 3 rd respondent further submits that the 3 rd respondent has brought all the originals of the petitioner to the Court for being handed over to the petitioner and were in fact handed over to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner today under due acknowledgment of the petitioner, who is present before this Court.
7. I have taken note of the respective submissions made.
8. Since, the 3 rd respondent had brought the original certificates to the Court today and the same were handed over to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in the presence of the petitioner, who is present in the Court, the grievance of the petitioner in the present Writ Petition stands redressed.
9. However, it is to be noted that instances of such nature of certificates being withheld are regularly occurring in spite of the authoritative pronouncements of this Court in Ms. Shanti Shriram ’s case(1 supra), D. Vaishnavi ’s case (2 supra) and Mohd. Abdul Mannan ’s case (3 supra) as well as the High Court of Madras in S. Muthukamatchi v. The Director of Technical Education, Anna University, The Vice Chancellor, Anna University, The District Collector and The Prinicipal, Mount Zion College of Engineering 4 , and the respondent Nos.1 & 2 seem to have not initiated any action against the colleges, which are withholding the original certificates of the students, who had sought admission into the said colleges and discontinued the studies thereafter midway, on the pretext of non-payment of the fees.
10. It is needless to emphasize that UGC by its
