IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 12518 of 2006 Between: Geethanjali Vidyalayam, Kallur, Khammam District, rep.by its Correspondent Smt. V.V. Sarala W/o. Purushotham, R/o. Kallur, Kallur Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Director of School Education, Andhra Pradesh, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Joint Director of School Education, Warangal, Warangal District. 3 The District Educational Officer, Khammam District, Khammam. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing Proceedings Rc. No. 1008/A2/2006, dated 5-5-2006 requiring the petitioner to pay Rs.20,000/- towards inspector fee for granting renewal of recognition of the petitioner school, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the Rules and offending Art.14 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner for granting renewal of recognition without insisting for payment of Rs.20,000/- forthwith and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.SUDHIR KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents.: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by Geethanjali Vidyalayam, Kallur rep. by its Correspondent Smt.V.V.Sarala with a prayer to issue a writ, order, or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Regional Joint Director of School Education, Warangal-2nd respondent in issuing proceedings Rc.No.1008/A2/2006, dated 05.05.2006, requiring the petitioner to pay Rs.20,000/- towards inspecting fee for granting renewal of recognition to the petitioner-School as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Rule nisi came to be issued on 22.06.2006. An interim direction came to be issued on the same day in W.P.M.P.No.15551 of 2006, which reads as hereunder: “There shall be interim suspension as prayed for and a further direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for renewal, without insisting enhancement of fee. Notice.” 3. Learned Government Pleader for School Education appearing for the respondents submits that the application of the petitioner-School has been considered and necessary orders have been passed and thereby no cause of action survives in this writ petition. 4. Recording the said submission, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. Nocosts. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:23rd July, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}