IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 9330 of 2004 Between: 1 The Management of Pragathi High School, Yapral, R.R. district, Rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent Sri. R. Srinivasa Reddy, S/o. Lakshma Reddy, aged 38 Years, Yapral, R.R. District. 2 The Management of Nightingale School, Rep. by its Correspondent Sri. T. Sudhir, S/o. T. Pochanna, Yapral, R.R. District. 3 The Management of St. George Grammer School Employees, Colony, Main Road, Near Yapral Bus Stop, Yapral, R.R.Dist., rep. by its Correspondent Sri Element Santiago, S/o. Sri Thomson Santiago, Yapral, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Educational Officer, R.R. District, R.R. District Collector Offices Complex, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Joint Director, School Education, Barkatpura, Hyderabad. 3 The Commissioner & Director, School Education, A.P., Hyderabad. 4 The Government of A.P., rep. by its Secretary, School Education, A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 5 The Management of City High School for Girls, rep. by its Correspondent Sri Anil Kundra, Ratna Colony, Behind Contonment Hospital, Bollaram, Secunderabad-10. ...RESPONDENTS 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 an appropriate Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondent authorities in not taking steps preventing the 5th respondent management as per the powers conferred under the A.P. Education Act, 1982 by instituting prosecution and closing the institution in pursuance of the letter No. 13563/A3/2003 dt. 7-4-2004. Counsel for the Petitioners : MR.K.RAM REDDY (not present) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : GP FOR EDUCATION Counsel for Respondent No.5 : Mr. N. Ashok Kumar. The Court made the following : ORDER : The four petitioners are aggrieved by the inaction on the part of respondents 1 to 3 in taking steps to prevent fifth respondent from running a High School for Girls without necessary permission and recognition. This Court admitted the writ petition on 1-6-2004. When the W.P.M.P. was posted on 1-9-2004, learned counsel for the petitioners was absent and there was no representation. Therefore, the matter was directed to be posted for today. Today also when the matter is called, learned counsel for the petitioners is absent and there is no representation. Be that as it is, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Education brought to the notice of this Court the letter addressed by second respondent to first respondent requesting to reject permission to fifth respondent School. In that view of the matter, the petitioners cannot have any grievance as necessary action has already been initiated on their representation. Recording the above, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J.) 07-10-2004. Msr. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Educational Officer, R.R. District, R.R. District Collector Offices Complex, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Joint Director, School Education, Barkatpura, Hyderabad. 3 The Commissioner & Director of School Education, A.P., Hyderabad. 4 The Secretary to Government, School Education Dept., Govt.of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 5. 2CCs to G.P. for Education, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad.(OUT) 6. 2CD copies HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO WRIT PETITION No.9330 of 2004 07-10-2004. (Msr)