IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9184 of 2009 Between: M. Rajeshwar, S/o. Pasham, R/o. Q.No. 529, I. Zone, Mandamarri (M), Adilabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Joint Director, School Education, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. 2 The District Educational Officer, Adilabad, Adilabad District. 3 The Mandal Educational Officer, Mandamarri, Adilabad District. 4 The Government of Andra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 5 Krishnaveni Talent School, Rep. by its Correspondent R. Venu S/o. Not Known, (St. Dominics School Premises) Rajivnagar, Old Bus Stand, Mandamarri, Adilabad District. 6 Sri Krishnaveni Talent School, Rep. by its Correspondent E. Sammi Reddy S/o. Not Known, (Sri Chaitanya College Premises) Rajivnagar, Old Bus Stand, Mandamarri, Adilabad District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 not to admit the students in respondents 5 and 6 schools without prior permission by the respondents 1 to 3 is illegal. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.T.KOTESHWARA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Sri V.Eswaraiah, J.) The petitioner, who is an employee of Singareni Collieries, residing at D.No.529, I-Zone, Mandamarri Mandal, Adilabad District, filed this writ petition by way of public interest litigation seeking a direction directing respondents 1 to 4 not to admit the students in respondents 5 and 6 schools without prior permission by respondents 1 to 3. It is stated that the petitioner made a representation before the District Educational Officer, Adilabad, on 27.4.2009 stating that respondents 5 and 6 are admitting students without obtaining any permission from the authorities concerned and exorbitantly collecting fees against the rules and requested to take appropriate action. We are not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the said allegations as to whether respondents 5 and 6 were running the schools without obtaining necessary permission from the authorities concerned. However, without going into the merits of the case, we dispose of the writ petition directing the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 27.4.2009, if the same has been received and pending, after giving reasonable opportunity to the concerned, in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. ___________________ P.SWAROOP REDDY, J. 29.6.2009 kpr