HC to Hear PIL on Delayed Fee Reimbursement

Hyderabad:A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M Moinuddin took on file a public interest litigation alleging failure of the state government in releasing post-matric scholarships under the reimbursement of tuition fee (RTF) scheme for minority students, pushing thousands into financial distress. The PIL was filed by Association for Socio Economic Empowerment of the Marginalised (ASEEM) and the Students Islamic Organisation (SIO). The contended that colleges were withholding original certificates of students for non-payment of fees, despite repeated government and TSCHE instructions prohibiting the practice. According to the petitioners, scholarship sanctions had drastically collapsed. RTI data showed that in 2023-24, out of 1,54,725 applications, only 40 were sanctioned; in 2024-25, not a single one has been approved. Over the last five years, more than four lakh applications were neither sanctioned nor marked pending, raising concerns of opacity. The petitioner pointed out that although `300 crore were allocated for 2024-25, only `41.86 crore i.e., 14 per cent had been spent. The petitioners argued that the failure of the state violated Articles 14 and 21, leading to rising dropout rates among minority students who could not pursue further education or jobs due to detained certificates. Representations made in February and August 2025 yielded no action, forcing the organisations to approach the court. The PIL sought immediate release of pending scholarships, a grievance redressal system, disclosure of all scholarship-related information, and directions to colleges to return students’ original certificates.

Plea challenges detention under PD Act

A two judge panel of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ of habeas corpus challenging the preventive detention order issued against a Warangal resident. The panel of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Gadi Praveen Kumar was hearing the writ plea filed by filed by Aerlam alias Muddangula Anuradha seeking production and release of her husband, Mudhangula Adithya. The detenue was being held pursuant to a detention order dated September 8 issued by the Warangal commissioner of police. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the detention order was illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the Constitution. It was argued that reliance on five FIRs involving alleged offences under the Insecticides Act, cheating provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Trade Marks Act could not justify resort to preventive detention when ordinary criminal law provided an adequate mechanism. It was contended that the authority mechanically relied on alleged antecedents without demonstrating any proximate or imminent threat, contrary to settled principles laid down by the Supreme Court. The state sought time to file a response.

Foreign-educated medico seeks additional marks

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ petition seeking relaxation of the minimum qualifying marks in the Foreign Medical Graduate Examination (FMGE) in the June 2025 session. Petitioner Keeni Shivani sought a declaration that she be declared as successful by relaxing, if necessary, the prescribed qualifying marks. It was contended that the failure of the authorities to prescribe lower qualifying marks for SC/ST candidates, including women candidates, was arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory, and in violation of the constitutional provisions. The petitioner sought directions to the respondents, particularly the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences, to declare her as passed and to frame differential qualifying criteria for SC/ST and women candidates in the FMGE screening test, in line with the constitutional guarantees of equality and protection of fundamental rights under Part III. The judge directed the respondents to file their response.

Scholar seeks continued stay in JNTU quarters

Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court refused to grant interim relief to a student who is allegedly continuing to reside in the JNTU-H quarters, despite completion of her course. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by S. Lavanya, research scholar. The petitioner contended that she filed a representation in response to the notice issued by the university, yet eviction proceedings were pursued without consideration of her explanation. She alleged that the university made her surrender of the quarters a pre-condition for issuance of the no-objection certificate (NOC) and provisional certificate, in addition to withholding refund of excess rent allegedly collected. She claimed that electricity and water supply to her quarter was disconnected, forcing her and her two children to face considerable hardship. Describing the university’s actions as arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of principles of natural justice, she sought protection from eviction until convocation and refund of the rental amount. The university contended that the petitioner completed her academic programme and therefore had no right to retain the premises. It was argued that she and her two children were occupying a large residential unit despite loss of eligibility and that issuance of certificates would be subject to vacating the quarters in accordance with campus regulations. The judge deferred the matter for further hearing.