Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Dr.M V Lakshmi Charitha vs The State Of Ap on 29 August, 2024

Author: R Raghunandan Rao

Bench: R Raghunandan Rao

                                       1
                                                            HCJ & RRR,J
                                                       W.P.No.18247/2024

APHC010361222024
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                 AT AMARAVATI                    [3446]
                          (Special Original Jurisdiction)

           THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF AUGUST
                TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                  PRESENT

      HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR

        THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

                      WRIT PETITION NO: 18247/2024

Between:

Dr.M V Lakshmi Charitha                                  ...PETITIONER

                                     AND

The State Of Ap and Others                           ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. C PRAKASH REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FW

2. GUTTAPALEM VIJAYA KUMAR (SC FOR Dr NTR HEALTH U)

Court made the following order:

(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)

Heard Sri C. Prakash Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for the

petitioner and Sri Guttapalem Vijaya Kumar, learned Standing Counsel

for NTR Health University.

HCJ & RRR,J

2. The petitioner studied from LKG to 10th class in Proddatur,

YSR Kadapa District, and did her intermediate in NRI Arts & Science

Junior College, Tirupati, during the year 2014 -2016. Thereafter, she

pursued her BDS course during the period 2017-2022 in Vydehi

Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Bangalore in Karnataka

State.

3. The petitioner appeared for NEET-MDS-2024 and sought

admission to MDS course in Andhra Pradesh, for the year 2024-2025,

by claiming local candidate status. However, she was denied the said

status, when she sought to register herself in the portal for online

counseling.

4. The petitioner being aggrieved by the refusal of the

respondent authorities, in treating her as a local candidate, for the

purpose of admission, has filed the present writ petition.

5. The petitioner contends that since she has undergone 12

years of schooling in the State of Andhra Pradesh, she would have to be

treated as a local candidate and cannot be treated as a non-local

candidate, because she studied outside Andhra Pradesh for the last four

years. She would contend that she is entitled to be treated as a local

candidate under Clause 4(2) of the Presidential Order, 1974. She would

also rely upon the judgment of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra

Pradesh in The Tahsildar, Hyderabad Urban Taluk, Hyderabad and

HCJ & RRR,J

Anr., vs. T. Venkata Reddy1, wherein a Division Bench of the erstwhile

High Court of Andhra Pradesh took the view that the domicile and

residence of the parents should be treated as the domicile and residence

of the candidate in such local area.

6. In view of certain peculiar developments in the erstwhile

State of Andhra Pradesh, Article 371-D of the Constitution of India was

introduced in 1974, to provide for equitable opportunities and facilities

for the people belonging to different parts of the State. For this purpose

the President of India was empowered to take necessary steps, by order,

for such equitable distribution of opportunities, in the matters of

employment and education. In exercise of this power, conferred on the

President of India, the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions

(Regulation of Admissions) Order, 1974, generally known as the

Presidential Order, 1974, was issued. Under this order, the State was

divided into various local areas and 85% of the seats in Educational

Institutions and Public Employment at certain levels were reserved for

local candidates of the said local areas. The order also specified the

conditions under which a person would be declared to be a local

candidate in a local area.

7. Paragraph 4 of the Presidential Order, which reads as

follows, set out these conditions:

AIR 1976 AP 408

HCJ & RRR,J

―4. Local Candidates:- 1) A candidate for admission to any course of study shall be regarded as a local candidate in relation to a local area -

(a) If he has studied in an educational institution or educational institutions in such local area for a period of not less than four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination, or

(b) Where, during the whole or any part of the four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination he has not studied in any educational institution, if he has resided in thaqt local area for a period of not less than four years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared.

2) A candidate for admission to any course of study who is not regarded as a local candidate under sub-

paragraph (1) in relation to any local area shall .--

a) if he has studied in educational institutions in the State for a period of not less than seven consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination, be regarded as a local candidate in relation to (i) such local area where he has studied for the maximum period out of the said period of seven years; or (ii) where the periods of his study in two or more local areas are equal, such local area where he has studied last in such equal periods; or

HCJ & RRR,J

b) if, during the whole or any part of the seven consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination, he has not studied in the educational institution in any local area, but has resided in the State during the whole of the said period of seven years, be regarded as a local candidate in relation to - (i) such local area where he has resided for the maximum period out of the said period of seven years, or (ii) where the periods of his residence in two or more local areas are equal such local area he has resided last in such equal periods.

Explanation - For the purposes of this paragraph, -

(i) ―educational institution‖ means a University or any educational institution recognized by the State Government, a University or other competent authority;

(ii) ―relevant qualifying examination‖, in relation to admission to any course of study, means the examination, a pass in which the minimum educational qualification for admission to such course of study;

(iii) In reckoning the consecutive academic years during which a candidate has studied, -

a) Any period of interruption of his tudy by reason of his failure to pass any examination;

and

b) Any period of his study in a Statewide University or a Statewide educational institution,

shall be disregarded.

HCJ & RRR,J

iv) The question whether any candidate for admission to any course of study has resided in any local area shall be determined with reference to the places where the candidate actually resided and not with reference to the residence of his parent or other guardian.

8. It is clear that the petitioner herein does not fall within the

parameters of paragraph 4(1). It appears that the petitioner is

contending that she should be treated as a local candidate in terms of

Paragraph-4 (2) of the Presidential Order, 1974.

9. Paragraph-4(2)(a) would apply to a candidate, who has

studied for seven consecutive academic years before the relevant

qualifying examination. In the present case, the petitioner has a break

of study and would not qualify under Paragraph-4(2)(a).

10. Paragraph 4(2)(b) would apply to the persons, who have not

studied in educational institutions in any local area who resided in the

said area before the said period. This clause, was interpreted by a

Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the

case of The Tahsildar, Hyderabad Urban Taluk, Hyderabad and Anr., vs.

T. Venkata Reddy. In this judgment, the Division Bench took the view

that Paragraph-4(2)(b) would be available to the candidates whose

parents were residents of the area. This was an additional benefit given

under the said judgment.

HCJ & RRR,J

11. Subsequently, a Full Bench of the erstwhile High Court of

Andhra Pradesh considered the same provision in the case of Bathina

Rajya Shilpa and etc. vs. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada

and Ors.,2. The Full Bench, in paragraph 45 of the said judgment, held

that a candidate can be treated as a local candidate under Paragraph-

4(2), in the following manner.

―45. However, a candidate who is not regarded as local a candidate under para 4(1) can be treated as a local candidate under sub-paragraph (2) if he/she fulfils either Clause (a) or Clause or Clause (b). Again clause

(b) is applicable only to candidates who have not studied in educational institutions but have resided in the State for a period of not less than seven consecutive academic years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he or he appeared or first appeared. Since the petitioner has studied in educational institutions, she doesn't come under that clause.‖

12. In the present case, the petitioner has pursued her studies

in the State of Andhra Pradesh, for a part of the relevant period, and as

such, would not be eligible to be considered as a local candidate under

Paragraph-4(2) of the Presidential Order, 1974.

13. In the circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed. There

shall be no order as to costs.

AIR 2002 AP 115 = 2001 SCC Online AP 1010

HCJ & RRR,J

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

closed.

DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

JS.