Disposed

Mother s Convent Upper Primary School, E/M, v. The Regional Joint Director of School Eductaion

Telangana HC21 Jun 2005WP/13151/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged a school's operation without recognition under A.P. Educational Institutions Rules, 1993. The High Court directed relevant authorities to act on a prior representation and disposed of the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 2 and 3 directed to ensure no school is run without permission and to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation.

Mother s Convent Upper Primary School, E/M, Vs… — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2005)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 13151 of 2005

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mother' s Convent Upper Primary School, E/M, Station Road Colony, Bellampalli Mandal ,Adilabad district, Rep by its Correspondent Shri. S.Satyanarayana.

¶9

..... PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Regional Joint Director of School Education School Education,

¶12

Warangal.

¶13

2 The District Educational Officer, Adilabad District.

¶14

3 The Mandal Educational officer, Bellampalli Mandal, Adilabad district.

¶15

4 Gayathri English Medium High School, Near Sri Satya Sai Mandir,

¶16

Bellampalli Mandal, Adilabad District, Rep by its Correspondent.

¶17

.....RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in allowing the respondent No.4 for running a school without any valid permission or recognition as prescribed and required under the A.P.Educational Institutions (Establishment, Recognition, Administration, and control of School under Private management) Rules,1993 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.T.SRIKANTH REDDY

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.4: None appeared.

¶21

The Court at the stage of admission made the following:

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner alleging that the 4^th respondent has established a School and is being run without obtaining necessary permission as required under the A.P. Educational Institutions (Establishment, Recognition, Administration, and Control of Schools under Private Management) Rules, 1993 (for brevity ‘the Rules’). Hence, the said action is illegal. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation dated 10-06-2005 to the District Educational Officer, who is the second respondent herein, to take appropriate action against the 4^th respondent. In spite of the representation, no action was taken by the respondents, therefore, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition.

¶24

2 . Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶25

3. As the representation has already been made by the petitioner to the 2^nd respondent on 10-06-2005, it is for the respondents 2 and 3 to see that if the 4^th respondent has no permission, he shall not be allowed to establish or run any School violating the provisions of the Education Act and the Rules made thereon.

¶26

4. The respondents are accordingly directed to take appropriate action and pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 10-062005.

¶27

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶28

S.ANANDA REDDY, J

¶29

21^st June, 2005

¶30

Note:

¶31

Furnish C.C. by tomorrow. B/o. SKM

¶32

Copy to

¶33

1 The Regional Joint Director of School Education School Education,

¶34

Warangal. 2 The District Educational Officer, Adilabad District. 3 The Mandal Educational officer, Bellampalli Mandal, Adilabad

¶35

District. 5. Two C.Cs. to the G.P for School Education,

¶36

High Court Buildings, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. (O.U.T.)

¶37

6. Two CD copies

¶38

Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRR}

Mother s Convent Upper Primary School, E/M, v. The Regional Joint Director of School Eductaion

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mother s Convent Upper Primary School, E/M, v. The Regional Joint Director of School Eductaion

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S. Haseena Begum D/o. S. Ameer Basha, Vs The Registrar Ntr University Of Health Sciences

Sri Ramanjaneya Medical Agencies, Vs The Superintendent and Convenor

G. Venkat Reddy, Vs The Motor Vehicles Inspector

N.Sudhakar Reddy, Vs The Nellore District Coop.Central Bank Ltd.

M.A. Hameed, E-89917, Vs The Apsrtc

Zamir Ur Rahiman, Vs Vice Chairman and Managing Director