Telangana high court backs state govt: No extra CSE seats for engineering colleges in 2024-25
Hyderabad: Upholding the state's authority to regulate engineering education,
Justice K Lakshman
of the
Telangana high court
dismissed a batch of writ petitions filed by several private
engineering colleges
challenging the state govt's rejection of their proposals to increase Computer Science Engineering (CSE) intake for the academic year 2024–25.The colleges, including institutions affiliated with prominent educational groups, had earlier approached the court claiming that the govt orders issued on Aug 23 and 24, 2024, were politically motivated.
The petitioners – including Malla Reddy and Marri Lakshma Reddy groups – argued that they were targeted due to perceived affiliations with the previous state govt.Petitioners cited an earlier division bench ruling from Aug 13, 2024, which had asked the state to reconsider their proposals. However, after review, the state govt again denied approvals, citing policy grounds, existing seat vacancies, and the need to maintain institutional parity.Justice Lakshman, in his detailed judgment, noted that the state examined each case individually and gave specific reasons for rejection, including low local demand in areas like Kandlakoya and Medchal-Malkajgiri. While All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU) had granted approvals, the court found that inspections by the Expert Visiting Committee were superficial and inadequate to support hike in intake.The judgment underscored the limited scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution, stating that courts cannot interfere with educational policy unless there's clear evidence of arbitrariness or malice — neither of which was found in this case. Allegations of discrimination and political bias lacked substantive proof, the judge stated.The court also noted that the admission cycle under AICTE and Telangana Engineering, Agriculture and Pharmacy Common Entrance Test (EAPCET) 2024 had concluded, making fresh admissions unfeasible. Evidence showed that even after mop-up rounds, a majority of students allotted to the petitioner colleges failed to enrol or attend classes.In dismissing the petitions, Justice Lakshman upheld the state's prerogative to regulate intake in order to prevent unchecked expansion and ensure a balance between emerging and traditional engineering disciplines. The court concluded that the govt's decisions were neither illegal nor arbitrary, and no grounds for judicial intervention were established.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
18 minutes ago
- Indian Express
At mahapanchayat in Rajasthan, call for Gujjar reservation, but disagreement over BJP govt response
Some members of the Gujjar community held a protest on railway tracks and stalled a train in Rajasthan's Bharatpur district Sunday after taking part in Mahapanchayat, which was called by BJP leader Vijay Bainsla, pressing for various demands including on reservation. The Mahapanchayat of Gujjar community began at 8 am Sunday in Pilupura and thousands of people from different areas attended it. During the meeting, a draft was sent to the Mahapanchayat from the government which was read out by Vijay Bainsla, who is also the president of Gujjar Aarakshan Sangharsh Samiti. After this, the meeting concluded. However, a section of the community expressed discontent with the government's response, gathered on the railway tracks and stopped the Sawai Madhopur–Mathura passenger express at Fatehsinghpura near Bayana town, Harshit Srivastav, PRO, Western Central Railways told The Indian Express. Srivastav said that though the train was stopped, the presence of security forces in nearby areas ensured that the law and order situation was under control, adding that all passengers were safe. Soon, the Collector and Superintendent of Police reached the spot, spoke to the protesters and the track, which is only 150 m from the Mahapanchayat venue, was cleared around 6:30 pm. Asked about the protest, Bainsla, son of the late Kirodi Singh Bainsla who had led several Gujjar agitations on the quota issue, said that the entire community and leaders are happy with the government's response to their main demands. 'To get the 5% reservation to Most Backward Classes (MBC) included in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution, a proposal would be recommended by the state Cabinet and it would urge the Centre (to ensure its passage). The entire community wanted this. It is a legislative issue. We all are happy,' Bainsla told PTI, adding it was their key demand. According to the draft read out by Bainsla, ministers will hold a meeting with the Gujjar Aarakshan Sangharsh Samiti in the next 60 days regarding the method of operation of MBC reservation and, if necessary, a decision will be taken as per law after obtaining legal opinion. The government also assured, as per the draft, that a meeting of the Committee of Ministers will be held every 3 months in which the representatives of Samiti will also be invited. The first meeting will be held in June last week. Bainsla said that another demand was that a nodal officer should be appointed in every district to dispose of police cases against community members during the Gujjar agitation. 'The government has agreed to it,' he claimed. Earlier in the day, during the meeting, Bainsla had accused his own government of not fulfilling the promises made to the Gujjars. On June 7, state MoS for Home, Jawahar Singh Bedam held a meeting with members of the Gujjar community in a hotel to convince them to call off the panchayat. Bedam told mediapersons, 'I got the information regarding the Mahapanchayat and its demands. I spoke to CM Bhajanlal Sharma about this, who said that the government is ready to hear anyone. Community leaders should come forward and put forth their demands. Government will listen and make an appropriate decision.' In 2008, when the Gujjar reservation movement erupted, Pilupura was at its centre. Under the leadership of Kirori Singh Bainsla, the Gujjar community took part in the movement and during clashes, 72 people died in police firing. —With PTI
Scroll.in
34 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
‘Core issues remain': Why Ladakh's leaders are dissatisfied with Centre's new domicile rules
After multiple rounds of talks with leaders from Ladakh, the Centre has announced a new domicile and job reservation policy for the Union territory. The anxiety over natives losing control over land, resources and employment opportunities had driven sustained protests in Ladakh over the last five years. By reserving most government jobs for local residents and elaborate restrictions on who can be a domicile of Ladakh, the Narendra Modi government has sought to address the demands from the cold desert region. However, the Ladakhi leadership has called it only a 'first step' and a 'breakthrough' in reaching a resolution. 'Our two main issues pertaining to statehood for Ladakh and Sixth Schedule status are still pending,' said Chering Dorjay, a senior Ladakhi leader and chairman of Leh Apex Body, one of the two bodies who carried out negotiations with the Union government on behalf of the people of Ladakh. 'There has been no discussion on those issues as of now.' He added: 'The core issues remain unaddressed.' The Ladakhi leadership had sought a constitutional guarantee in the form of the Sixth Schedule which guarantees protections over land and a nominal autonomy for the country's tribal areas. In Ladakh, more than 97% of the population belongs to Scheduled Tribes. More crucially, the new rules do not impose any restrictions on outsiders buying land in Ladakh, the leaders said. What the new policy entails When New Delhi decided to create a separate Union territory of Ladakh without from the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir in August 2019, there was euphoria in Leh. However, the implications of the decision to scrap Jammu and Kashmir's special status under Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution soon became clear. Like the rest of the citizens of the now non-existent state of Jammu and Kashmir, the people of Ladakh had also lost their exclusive rights to own immovable property and get government jobs in the region. In August 2021, both Kargil and Leh rejected the Union territory status for Ladakh and demanded statehood instead. By 2022, the growing anxiety over non-locals being eligible to own land and take jobs in Ladakh had crystallized into a set of four demands of the Ladakh's leadership: statehood to Ladakh; constitutional safeguards under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution; separate Lok Sabha seats for Leh and Kargil districts and the rollout of a recruitment process and a separate Public Service Commission for Ladakh. The Centre's June 2 decision partially addresses those demands. Under the new rules, only a person who has resided in Ladakh for a period of 15 years since its formation as a union territory on October 31, 2019, shall be eligible to be a domicile of the Union territory. A person who has studied for a period of seven years – from October 31, 2019 – and written Class 10 or Class 12 examinations in an educational institution located in the Union territory of Ladakh, also qualifies to be a domicile. The domicile rule, however, is 'valid only for the purpose of appointment to the posts under the Union territory of Ladakh as defined in Ladakh Civil Services Decentralization and Recruitment.' The Centre has also brought in an ordinance to amend the reservation policy. According to this, 85% of jobs and admissions in professional educational institutions in Ladakh shall be reserved for residents of the Union territory. This includes 80% of reservation for Scheduled Tribes, 4% for those living along the Line of Control or the Line of Actual Control and 1% for Scheduled Castes. This is in addition to the 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections. Prior to this, the cap on reservation in Jammu and Kashmir, of which Ladakh was a part, was 50 %. Leh Apex Body's Dorjay acknowledged that the central government has addressed employment-related insecurities. 'What's happened is that 95% of government jobs are now reserved for locals,' he said. But he added: 'It's a breakthrough but there's not much [more] to it.' Sajjad Kargili, the representative of Kargil Democratic Alliance, the group that represents Kargil district in the negotiations with the Centre, said that the domicile policy has left them dissatisfied. 'Our demand is that instead of 15 years, the mandatory duration of living in Ladakh should be 30 years if anyone wants to become a domicile,' he said. According to Kargili, the Ladakh leadership has already raised the matter with the Centre. 'They have assured us that they will consider this demand. It's in the minutes of the meeting,' Kargili added. The land question With the protections under Article 370 and Article 35A gone in 2019, there is no bar against buying immovable property in the region. As of now, no law stops outsiders from buying land in Ladakh – a source of anxiety for the residents. Indeed, the leadership in Ladakh is conscious that the new rules are ambiguous about this concern. 'The domicile policy is only for jobs and it only talks about that domiciles are eligible for government jobs,' said another member of the Ladakh leadership, who was part of the deliberations with the Centre and declined to be identified. For now, the member said, they are assuming that this domicile policy has no bearing on land rights as the Centre's notification clearly states that domicile is valid only for government jobs. 'If that's not the case and if it has any bearing on land rights, then we don't accept the domicile policy.' The member pointed out that they had agreed to the domicile policy only because of the jobs crisis in Ladakh. Since 2019, recruitment in government jobs has stalled in Ladakh, owing to the lack of clarity over who qualifies for domicile status. With a new policy now in place, the Ladakh leadership is now waiting for the government to finalise recruitment rules and advertise vacancies. 'It's a sort of an interim relief,' the member of the Ladakh leadership said. 'It's what the MHA officials call picking the low-hanging fruit. Now, we will wait for the government to advertise vacancies.' J&K and Ladakh: A study in contrast Even though the Ladakh leadership argued that the Centre's decisions do not address the fundamental demands of the people of Ladakh, many say the region has got a better deal than the neighbouring Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir. On Twitter, Jammu-based political commentator Zafar Choudhary criticised political leaders in both Jammu and Kashmir for failing to negotiate such a deal with the Centre. Both Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh took the formal shape of Union territories on October 31, 2019. But the Centre showed a visible urgency in framing domicile rules for Jammu and Kashmir. In March 2020, just five months after formally becoming a Union territory and amidst a nationwide lockdown to fight the coronavirus, the Union home ministry issued the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Adaptation of State Laws) Order 2020. Under these rules, anyone who 'who has resided for a period of 15 years in the union territory of J&K or has studied for a period of seven years and appeared in Class 10th/12th examination in an educational institution located in the UT of J&K' qualifies to be a domicile of Jammu and Kashmir. At that time, many Kashmiri political leaders were in detention or under house arrest. Many political parties had described the order as 'humiliating'. National Conference leader and current chief minister Omar Abdullah, who had been just released from a long detention had questioned the timing of the order. 'At a time when all our efforts & attention should be focused on the #COVID outbreak the government slips in a new domicile law for J&K. Insult is heaped on injury when we see the law offers none of the protections that had been promised,' Abdullah had posted on his Twitter/X account on April 1, 2020. Unlike Ladakh, where the domicile rule applies prospectively, beginning from October 31, 2019, the domicile rules in the case of Jammu and Kashmir applied retrospectively. That means that anyone who had been living in Jammu and Kashmir for a period of 15 years until the notification of domicile rules in 2020 was eligible to be a domicile of Jammu and Kashmir. In other words, while Ladakh will get new domiciles only after 2034, in the case of Jammu and Kashmir, many non-natives, who fulfill the criteria of domicile rules, have already become part of Jammu and Kashmir's population. In April, the Jammu and Kashmir government informed the legislative Assembly that more than 83,000 individuals who were not originally permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir have been granted domicile certificates over the past two years. The revelation had added to the anxieties of the Muslim-majority Union territory where the fear of demographic change has become one of the main concerns since August, 2019. The next round Besides the domicile and reservation policy for Ladakh, the Centre has also recognised English, Hindi, Urdu, Bhoti and Purgi languages as the official languages 'to be used for all or any of the official purposes of the Union territory' of Ladakh. It has also reserved one-third of the total seats in the two Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Councils of Leh and Kargil for women. Even though New Delhi might view these as significant steps, Ladakh's leadership says these were not part of their demands. 'There was nothing about language or reservation of women in our demands,' Dorjay added. 'Our demands are concerned with the overall protection and security of the people of Ladakh.' With the next meeting between the centre's High-Powered Committee and the Ladakh leadership likely towards the end of this month, the questions like statehood and Sixth Schedule status will rise again. 'We are not going back on these two demands,' Dorjay added.
India Gazette
36 minutes ago
- India Gazette
"Rahul Gandhi's article is not against anyone." Maharashtra Congress chief
Mumbai (Maharashtra) [India], June 9 (ANI): Maharashtra Congress President Harshwardhan Vasantrao Sapkal came in defence of Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition (LoP) Rahul Gandhi over the latter's remarks regarding the alleged 'rigging' of the 2024 Maharashtra assembly elections and said that he has only introduced facts about the Election Commission's data before the people. 'Rahul Gandhi has not written any article against the BJP. Rahul Gandhi's article is not against anyone. He has some facts about the data of the Election Commission, and through his article, he has kept the same data among the people,' Sapkal told ANI. He attacked Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis. 'Jo iske laabharti karke jo sarkar bani hai, uske jo Mukhyemantri hai, vo election commission ka bachav kar rahe hai (The Chief Minister, who is the beneficiary of this government that has been formed by cheating, is defending the election commission,' Sapkal alleged. 'Why are they defending the election commission? Are you the assigned lawyer of the Election Commission? The election commission must answer these questions,' he added. On Sunday, Fadnavis launched a scathing attack against Gandhi for allegations against the EC, accusing him of consistently misunderstanding the country's mood and misplacing blame. Speaking to mediapersons in Hindi, Fadnavis said, 'Ta-umr Rahul Gandhi aap yahi galti karte rahe, dhool chehre pe thi aur aap aina saaf karte rahe (Throughout your life, Rahul Gandhi, you have always made the same mistake; the dust was on your face, but you kept cleaning the mirror).' The BJP has come down heavily on Congress MP and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, following his recent remarks on the elections, with Bihar Deputy Chief Minister Vijay Kumar Sinha saying, 'A leader of the opposition who uses such language is not fit to hold that post.' He also criticised Gandhi for raising doubts regarding constitutional institutions. Sinha reached Ayodhya for a two-day program on Sunday and said, 'They carry the Constitution book in hand and yet raise doubts about constitutional institutions. This reflects their mindset. They do not truly believe in the Constitution or its institutions. An opposition leader who uses such language is not fit to hold that post.' This comes after Gandhi alleged that the Maharashtra assembly election held in November 2024 was 'rigged' and claimed the same could happen in the upcoming Bihar assembly polls. In a post on X, Gandhi shared his article published in a newspaper, explaining the 'rigging' in the Maharashtra assembly polls. 'Maharashtra assembly elections in 2024 were a blueprint for rigging democracy. My article shows how this happened, step by step,' Gandhi said. The former Congress President explained a five-point process. He said that step one includes rigging the panel that appoints the Election Commission and adding fake voters to the electoral roll. He further claimed that the following steps include inflating the voter turnout, targeting the bogus voting exactly where the BJP needs to win and hiding the evidence. 'Step 1: Rig the panel for appointing the Election Commission; Step 2: Add fake voters to the roll; Step 3: Inflate voter turnout; Step 4: Target the bogus voting exactly where the BJP needs to win; Step 5: Hide the evidence,' Gandhi said. He further labelled rigging as 'match-fixing', saying that the side cheats might win the game but damage institutions and destroy public faith in the result. 'It's not hard to see why the BJP was so desperate in Maharashtra. But rigging is like match-fixing. The side that cheats might win the game, but (it) will damage institutions and destroy public faith in the result. All concerned Indians must see the evidence. Judge for themselves. Demand answers,' the Rae Bareli MP said. Gandhi warned that the 'match-fixing' of Maharashtra would come to Bihar next, where the polls are due later this year, and then 'anywhere' the BJP was losing elections. 'Match-fixed elections are a poison for any democracy,' he added. (ANI)
