Kare Rajeev, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court disposed of a PIL filed regarding schools operating without recognition. After noting that applications for recognition had been filed by most respondents and one was pending, the court directed the authority to decide the pending application for the 8th respondent and closed the petition.
What did the court decide?
Directed the authority to take a decision on the recognition application made by the 8th respondent; petition and pending miscellaneous petitions closed.
What the court decided
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 275 of 2014
Date: 02.02.2015
Between: Kare Rajeev And The State of A.P., rep., by its Principal Secretary to School Education Dept, Hyderabad & others.
… Petitioner
… Respondents
This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 275 of 2014
ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
This writ petition has been filed for a writ of Mandamus against respondent Nos.3 and 4 for not taking action against respondent Nos.5 to 8, who are allegedly running the school without having any recognition. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4, wherein it was stated that initially there had been no recognition for respondent Nos.5 to 7 schools, and thereafter, they applied for recognition and the same was granted. Therefore, as on today granting of recognition to these respondents cannot be said to be illegal. So far as the 8th respondent is concerned, it is stated in the counter affidavit that it has already applied for recognition, but no decision has been taken as yet.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the authorities were directed to take a decision on the application for school recognition made by the 8th respondent?
Whether the writ petition regarding illegal running of schools without recognition should be closed after granting the aforementioned direction?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Kare Rajeev
- respondent
State of A.P.
Coram
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- PIL/275/2014
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court