Abm Aided Primary and High School Vs the State of Ap

¶1

APHC010299262025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3327] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 15123/2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

ABM AIDED PRIMARY AND HIGH SCHOOL, GOPANIPALLI VILLAGE, KOMAROLE MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT - 523373, REPRESENTED BY ITS CORRESPONDENT G.V.I. PRABHAT STETTLER, S/O. LATE G PRABHAKAR BABU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

A N D

¶10

THE STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶11

THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, VENKATADRI TOWERS, BESIDE HAPPY RESORTS, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶12

THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus action of the respondents in not releasing the pending arrears of maintenance grant of 6 percent grant in aid to the petitioners school for the years 2020-21, 2021-2022, 2022-23, 2023-24, 2024-2025 as bad,

¶16

SRK, J W.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

illegal, arbitrary and violative of articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and in contravention of the orders of this Hon'ble rendered in W.P No. 3449 of 2003 dated 30.09.2016 and consequently direct the respondents to release the pending arrears of maintenance grant of 6 percent grant in aid to the petitioners school and pass

¶19

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to direct the respondents to forthwith release the pending arrears of maintenance grant of 6% grant in aid to the petitioners’ school for the years 2020-21, 20212022, 2022-23, 2023-24, 2024-2025 and pass

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶22

1.D V SASIDHAR

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶24

1.GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION

¶25

2.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

¶26

The Court made the following:

¶27

SRK, J W.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶28

3

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the action of respondents in not releasing the pending arrears of maintenance grant-in-aid at 6% to the petitioner-school for the years 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24, 2024-25 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to release the aforesaid pending arrears.

¶31

Contents of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, in brief, are that, the petitioner school was established in the year 1946 and got aided recognition valid till Academic Year 2027-28. The petitioner school was having strength of around 110 students and there are six teachers working in the school against aided and unaided posts.

¶32

(b) The petitioner school was started to impart free education to the children in rural areas and in pursuance of the same, the petitioner school is providing education in its vicinity to the needy and poor students. The maintenance grant provided by the respondent authorities, is to meet the expenditure of menial staff, rent, taxes, repairs, stationery, furniture and other miscellaneous expenses etc. Initially, the schools are entitled to receive the maintenance grant at 10%, however, the same was reduced to 6% and this Court vide Order in Writ Appeal No.963 of

¶33

SRK, J W.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶34

4

¶35

1991, directed the respondent authorities to release the grant at 6% of the basic pay of teaching grant that is being drawn from year to year.

¶36

(c) While the matter stood thus, in the year 1994, the Government reduced the maintenance grant to 2% by way of G.O.Ms.No.320, dated 16.09.1994 and this Court vide Order, dated 19.03.1997 in Writ Petition No.20160 of 1994 struck off the said G.O., declaring the same as unconstitutional and the said Order was upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.526 of 1997 and the Government was directed to release grant-in-aid at 6%.

¶37

(d) In the year 1995, the Government enacted the Andhra Pradesh Private Educational Institutions Maintenance Grant (Regulation) Act, 1995 (Act No.11 of 1995) to regulate the fixation and payment of maintenance grant to private educational institutions in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Division Bench of this Court also adverted to these provisions and held that the grantin-aid schools are entitled for maintenance grant at 6%.

¶38

(e) The respondent authorities are adopting pick and choose method for release of maintenance grant at 6% and giving benefit to several other educational institutions and denying the said benefit to the petitioner school.

¶39

SRK, J W.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶40

5

¶41

(f) The subject issue was settled by this Court in Writ Petition No.3449 of 2003 vide Order, dated 30.09.2016, wherein, the said act of respondent authorities was declared as arbitrary and discriminatory. The Order of the learned Single Judge was upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.1296 of 2016 and also the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.No.31292 of 2018.

¶42

(g) This Court vide Order, dated 19.03.2024 and 17.07.2023 in Writ Petition No.5956 of 2024 and Writ Petition No.16831 of 2023, respectively, disposed of similar matters, directing the respondents to release maintenance grant-in-aid at 6% in terms of Orders passed in Writ Petition No.3449 of 2003, dated 30.09.2016. Hence, the case of the petitioner school stands on the similar footing and petitioner school is entitled for the said benefit and if, the respondent authorities are not directed to release the maintenance grant-in-aid at 6% to the petitioner school, petitioner-school would be put to irreparable loss and injury. Hence, the Writ Petition.

¶43

Learned counsel for the petitioner placed the copy of the Order passed by the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad in Writ Petition No.3449 of 2003, dated 30.09.2016. A perusal of the said order goes to show that the learned Single Judge allowed the said Writ Petition in similar circumstances. The

¶44

SRK, J W.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶45

6

¶46

relevant paragraphs of the said Order read as under (Paragraph Nos.21 & 22):

¶47

“21. In any view of the matter, the contention of the learned Government Pleader is that the petitioner is not entitled to maintenance grant in view of G.O.Ms.No.320, which was struck down by the court in the judgments referred supra. Even otherwise the discriminatory attitude of the Government giving concession to one education institution and denying benefit to the petitioner’s educational institution cannot be encouraged by the Courts, since it is arbitrary and discriminatory in not releasing grant in aid to the petitioner’s association whose object is to provide free education. In those circumstances, this Court has no option except to hold that the action of the respondents is arbitrary in not releasing the maintenance grant in aid to the petitioner’s educational institution and consequently, I hold that the petitioner is entitled to all the benefits as decided in Recognized Schools Managements Associations case. Hence, the respondents are directed to work out maintenance grant @ 6% and arrange to pay the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order to the petitioner’s educational institution, on par with other schools.

¶48

22. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is allowed.”

¶49

Learned counsel for the petitioner school brought to the notice of this Court that the matter in Writ Petition No.3449 of 2003 was carried in appeal vide Writ Appeal No.1296 of 2016 and a Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad dismissed the appeal vide Judgment, dated

¶50

SRK, J W.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶51

7

¶52

03.08.2018, confirmed the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.3449 of 2003.

¶53

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner school and learned Government Pleader for School Education representing respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶54

Learned counsel for the petitioner further brought to the notice of this Court that the Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.31292 of 2018 preferred before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the Order, dated 03.08.2018 in Writ Appeal No.1296 of 2016, was also dismissed vide Order, dated 14.12.2018. Therefore, prays the Court to pass similar orders in this Writ Petition also.

¶55

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for School Education filed instructions of the District Educational Officer, Prakasam District at Ongole, wherein, it is stated the petitioner-school has not submitted the Annual Administration Report i.e. Financial Statement, MG Original Voucher Bills for the years 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25.

¶56

However, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for School Education representing respondent Nos.1 to 3 would submit that the petitioner school is eligible for pending arrears of Maintenance of Grant-in-aid at 6% only for three (03) years i.e. for the years 2022-23, 2023-24 and

¶57

SRK, J W.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶58

8

¶59

2024-25 but not for five (05) years as claimed for, and the learned counsel for the petitioner acceded to the said submission.

¶60

In view of the same, having regard to the decision of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad by an Order, dated 30.09.2016 in Writ Petition No.3449 of 2003, which was upheld by a Division Bench of erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad in Writ Appeal No.1296 of 2016 vide Order, dated 03.08.2018 and also the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.No.31292 of 2018, and also considering the submission of the learned Government Pleader for School Education representing respondent Nos.1 to 3, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent authorities to pay Maintenance Grant-in-aid at 6% to the petitioner school for three (03) years i.e. for the years 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25, within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶61

There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ Petition.

¶62

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall also stand closed.

¶63

JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶64

13^th August, 2025.

¶65

DNB

Abm Aided Primary and High School v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abm Aided Primary and High School v. the State of Ap

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

Smt. G.Sunitha Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr. Lay Kanjibhai Paghdar, Vs Dr. Ntr University of Health Sciences

Daggumalli Dharma Rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

M.C.Ganganna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kambidi Chinna Babu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Sangameswara High School Vs the State of Ap