High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 10 TEL CK 4926

Juveriya Sultana & Anr. vs The State Of Telangana & Anr.

Telangana High Court, Hyderabad · Decided on 30 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
P. Sam Koshy, C.J · Suddala Chalapathi Rao, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 36878 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 386 words

per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice P.Sam Koshy)

Heard Sri Abdul Kabeer, leaned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri T. Sharath, learned Standing Counsel for Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences, appearing for respondent No.2.

2.

The instant Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioners for admission to MBBS/BDS course under NEET-UG 2026, under Category-II (NRI Quota).

3.

The contention of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that the petitioners have participated in the earlier phase of counseling for admission to MBBS/BDS course under Management Quota B-Category, but did not secure the seat. Now, the petitioners want to consider their case under C-Category NRI quota and approached respondent No.2 to permit them to upload NRI documents. But, respondent No.2 has not taken any action. Hence, the petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to permit them to participate in the next round of counselling, subject to their fulfilling the requisite eligibility criteria for being considered as a candidate under the NRI Quota.

4.

Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2-University submits that subject to the petitioners furnishing the requisite documents in support their claim, respondent No.2 would consider the case of the petitioners and permit them to participate in the next round of counselling, subject to their fulfilling the requisite eligibility criteria for being considered as a candidate under the NRI Quota.

5.

The submission made by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2-University is fair and, in view thereof, no purpose would be served by keeping the instant Writ Petition pending.

6.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to furnish before respondent No.2 all the relevant documents in support of their claim for admission under the NRI Quota. Upon submission of the said documents, respondent No.2 shall scrutinize the same in accordance with the applicable guidelines, notwithstanding the fact that the documents were submitted at a belated stage. If, upon such scrutiny, the petitioners are found eligible and otherwise fulfils the requisite eligibility criteria for admission under the NRI Quota, they shall be permitted to participate in the subsequent round of counselling. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.