S M N R O Primary School Vs Sri Praveen Prakash IAS

This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.31803 of 2023, dated 11.12.2023. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted hereunder:

¶18

“ 3. During hearing, learned Government Pleader for School Education as well as learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by earlier orders of this Court in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 and batch, dated 05.01.2023, wherein a learned single Judge of this Court passed a detailed Common Order. Operative portion of the said order reads as under:

¶19

“9. In view of the above stand taken by the Government, all the Writ Petitions are disposed of with the following directions:

¶20

i) The respondent-authorities are hereby directed to permit the petitioners-institutions to fill up all the Aided vacancies in terms of G.O.Ms.No.1, Education, dated 01.01.1994 and also as per the Schedule prescribed under Sections 19&25 of the Act, 2009;

¶21

ii) In future also, whenever vacancies arise, the institutions have

¶22

to make applications to the Competent authorities for filling up the vacancies;

¶23

iii) On such applications, the Competent authorities shall inform the institution about the availability of qualified surplus staff, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of application and allot said surplus staff on permanent basis;

¶24

iv) If surplus staff are not available, the Competent authority shall inform the same and permit the petitioners-institutions to fill up the vacancies in accordance with the above said Rule, preferably within a period of two (02) months;

¶25

v) So far as minority institutions are concerned, the above procedure is not applicable insofar as allotment of surplus staff are concerned, in view of the Judgments of Division Bench of this Court rendered in Modern High School, Zamisthanpur V. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others and Ester Axene Res. High School and Others V. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others.

¶26

vi) The entire exercise shall be completed by the respondentauthorities within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order”

¶27

3

¶28

4. In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid order, this Writ Petition is also disposed of in terms of the order dated 05.01.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 and Batch. There shall be no order as to costs. ”

¶29

Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has furnished a copy of the proceedings of the District Educational Officer, West Godavari, Bhimavaram, bearing Rc.No.1961/B4/2024, dated 17.10.2024, through which the speaking orders were passed communicating the petitioner-institution that, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court and in exercise of powers under G.O.Ms.No.1, Education (PS.2), dated 01.01.1994 and Right to Education Act, 2009 norms, it was found that the petitioner-institution is having 32 students and already two teachers are working in the petitioner-institution and as such, the request for filling up of the aided vacant posts in the petitioner-institution cannot be considered at this juncture.

¶30

In view of the fact that, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, the respondent No.3-District Educational Officer has already passed speaking orders on 17.10.2024 informing the petitioner institution that it is having only 32 students and already 2 teachers are working in the said institution, the request for filling up of aided post in the institution cannot be considered at this juncture, this Court is of the opinion that the respondents have complied with the orders passed by this Court.

¶31

4

¶32

Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. However, the petitioner is

¶33

at liberty to challenge the said proceedings of the District Educational Officer, dated 17.10.2024, if at all, he is aggrieved. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶35

__________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶36

Dated: 04.04.2025 MDP

¶37

APHC010107532024

¶38

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶39

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶40

[3333]

¶41

FRID A Y, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶42

PRESENT

¶43

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1499/2024

¶44

Between:

¶45

S M N R O Primary Sch o ol ...PETITIONER

¶46

AND

¶47

Sri Praveen Prakash Ias and Others ...CONTEMNOR(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶48

1.SRI VIJAY MATHU K UMILLI

¶49

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

¶50

1.L V S NAGARAJU

¶51

2

¶52

The Court made the following Order:

¶53

This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.31803 of 2023, dated 11.12.2023. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted hereunder:

¶54

“ 3. During hearing, learned Government Pleader for School Education as well as learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by earlier orders of this Court in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 and batch, dated 05.01.2023, wherein a learned single Judge of this Court passed a detailed Common Order. Operative portion of the said order reads as under:

¶55

“9. In view of the above stand taken by the Government, all the Writ Petitions are disposed of with the following directions:

¶56

i) The respondent-authorities are hereby directed to permit the petitioners-institutions to fill up all the Aided vacancies in terms of G.O.Ms.No.1, Education, dated 01.01.1994 and also as per the Schedule prescribed under Sections 19&25 of the Act, 2009;

¶57

ii) In future also, whenever vacancies arise, the institutions have

¶58

to make applications to the Competent authorities for filling up the vacancies;

¶59

iii) On such applications, the Competent authorities shall inform the institution about the availability of qualified surplus staff, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of application and allot said surplus staff on permanent basis;

¶60

iv) If surplus staff are not available, the Competent authority shall inform the same and permit the petitioners-institutions to fill up the vacancies in accordance with the above said Rule, preferably within a period of two (02) months;

¶61

v) So far as minority institutions are concerned, the above procedure is not applicable insofar as allotment of surplus staff are concerned, in view of the Judgments of Division Bench of this Court rendered in Modern High School, Zamisthanpur V. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others and Ester Axene Res. High School and Others V. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others.

¶62

vi) The entire exercise shall be completed by the respondentauthorities within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order”

¶63

3

¶64

4. In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid order, this Writ Petition is also disposed of in terms of the order dated 05.01.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 and Batch. There shall be no order as to costs. ”

¶65

Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has furnished a copy of the proceedings of the District Educational Officer, West Godavari, Bhimavaram, bearing Rc.No.1961/B4/2024, dated 17.10.2024, through which the speaking orders were passed communicating the petitioner-institution that, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court and in exercise of powers under G.O.Ms.No.1, Education (PS.2), dated 01.01.1994 and Right to Education Act, 2009 norms, it was found that the petitioner-institution is having 32 students and already two teachers are working in the petitioner-institution and as such, the request for filling up of the aided vacant posts in the petitioner-institution cannot be considered at this juncture.

¶66

In view of the fact that, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, the respondent No.3-District Educational Officer has already passed speaking orders on 17.10.2024 informing the petitioner institution that it is having only 32 students and already 2 teachers are working in the said institution, the request for filling up of aided post in the institution cannot be considered at this juncture, this Court is of the opinion that the respondents have complied with the orders passed by this Court.

¶67

4

¶68

Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. However, the petitioner is

¶69

at liberty to challenge the said proceedings of the District Educational Officer, dated 17.10.2024, if at all, he is aggrieved. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶70

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶71

__________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶72

Dated: 04.04.2025 MDP

S M N R O Primary School v. Sri Praveen Prakash IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S M N R O Primary School v. Sri Praveen Prakash IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N Kavitha Vs K Mahaboob Basha

The Management of Mh Appa Aided High School Vs K. Sashidhar

M/S Shriram General Insurance Com., Ltd. Vs Surampudi Durga

The Assistant General Manager, Rg-I, Vs The Presiding Officer

M/s Fertile Green Inc. Vs M. M. Nayak, IAS

Tunga Rama Devi Vs the State of Ap