Disposed

Viswakavi Concept School v. M.V.V. Raghu Babu

Telangana HC18 Mar 2025WA/326/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the Writ Appeal. Counsel reached a consensus wherein the appellant was granted liberty to challenge subsequent proceedings in fresh appropriate jurisdiction. The Court reserved liberty accordingly while expressly stating it expressed no opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to appellant to assail proceedings dated 02.03.2024 in fresh appropriate proceedings.

Viswakavi Concept School Vs M.V.V. Raghu Babu — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³⁴⁴⁶ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CH]EF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

¶6

WRIT APPEAL NO: 326 OF 2025

¶7

Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent^preferred against the Order dated 2710312024 passed in W.P No. 5572 of 2024 on the file of the High Court.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Viswakavi Concept School, Situated Plot No. 44, H No.^{4-928,Rajappa} Nagar, High Court Colony Vanasthalipruam, Hayathnagar, RR District Rep by its President, Koti Dhanalakshmi Wo.Sai Prasad, aged 48^{years, R!/} o.^{H No.} 4-1 1-51ISLV/101 Satya Lake view, behind bus depot, Vasapari Nagar colony Hayathnagar, RR district

¶10

...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT No.6

¶11

AND

¶12

M.V.V. Raghu Babu, S/o. Narasimha Rao, aged 55^years, Occ. Secretary^and Correspondent Millenimum High School Plot No.44,^{RajappaNagar,} HighCourt Colony Vanasthalipuram, Hayathnagar M, RR District.

¶13

...RESPONDENT/WRIT PETITIONER

¶14

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary,^Departmentof Education Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad

¶15

The Commissioner and Director of School Education, Hyderabad

¶16

The Regional Director of School Education, Hyderabad

¶17

The District Educational Officer, Kongarakalam Ranga^{Reddy District}

¶18

The Mandal Educational Officer, Hayathnagar mandal^{Ranga Reddy District}

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

lA NO: 3 OF 2025

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC^prayingthat in the circumstances^stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the High} Court^{may be pleasedto}

¶22

SUSPEND the operation of the Order daled 27.03.2024^{made in WP No. 5572 of} 2024 passed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶23

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI B.S.S.PRASAD

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI T.R.V.S.S.S.V.PRASAD

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 6: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION

¶26

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶27

I l I !

¶28

¶29

THE HON,BLE THE ACTING CHIEF^{JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL} AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE^{RENUKA YARA}

¶30

WRIT APPEAL No.326 of 2o25

¶31

JUDGMENT^(Per the Hon'bte^the Acting^{Chief JusticeSujoy Paut):}

¶32

¶33

the Sri B.S.S. Prasad, learned^{counsel for} appellant/respondent^{No.6 and SriT.R.V.S.S.S'V'Prasad,} learned counsel for respondent^{No. 1/writ petitioner.}

¶34

With the consent, frnallY^heard.

¶35

I t

¶36

During the course of hearing,^{learned counselfor the} parties reached to a consensus.^{It is agreed that the present} appellant may be given^{liberty toassail theproceedings} No.95lA5l2024, dated^{O2.O3.2O24,in freshappropriate} proceedings. In that event, it is^{agreed that the impugnedorder} of learned Single Judge^{will not come in the way of the present} appellant.

¶37

4 . In view of consensus^{arrived at, the Writ Appeal is} disposed of by reserving^{libertyas prayedfor with observation} that in the event aforesaid^{proceedingsdated 02'03 '2024is} challenged by the appellant^{in an appropriateproceeding,the} validity of said proceedings^{shall be decided on its own merits by}

¶38

¶39

appropriate fo.rum. It is made clear that this Court has not

¶40

expressed anv opinisn on merits of the case. No costs;

¶41

Interl.ocutory applications, if any pending, shall also

¶42

stand closed.

¶43

SD/-K.SAILESHI ot NT RE_S|SIBAR--

/ITRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 The Principal Secretary, Department of^{Education SecretariatBuildings'} Saifabad, Hyderabad, State of^Telangana.

¶48

2 The Commissioner and Director of School^{Education,Hyderabad}

¶49

3 The Regional Director of School Education,^Hyderabad

¶50

4 The District Edr.rcational Officer, Kongarakalam^{Ranga Reddy Disftict}

¶51

5 The Mandal Eiducational Officer, Hayathnagar mandal^{Ranga Reddy District}

¶52

6 One CC to SRI B.S.S.PRASAD, Advocate [OPUC]

¶53

7 One CC to SRI T.R.V.S.S.S.V.PRASAD, Advocate [OPUC]

¶54

B Two CCs to GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION, High^{Courtfr:r the State of} Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶55

Two CD Copies

BSR LS s

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1810312025

JUDGMENT

OF
()
!,7
l!,,
L. "ss
Sril ,. r
a.

¶61

WA.No.326 of 2025

¶62

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEAL,

¶63

WITHOUT COSTS €f^ow

Viswakavi Concept School v. M.V.V. Raghu Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Viswakavi Concept School v. M.V.V. Raghu Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nandyala Ajit Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax (Prosecution) Vs Sri Bala Reddy

The State of Telangana Vs M.Narsimulu

Md Mashuq Miya Vs the Narasampet Nagara Panchayath

Kadathala Aravind Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

The State of Telangana Vs The State of Telangana