IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16751 of 2005 Date: 29.07.2005 Between: 1 Samatha Degree College, Thorrur Warangal District. Rep.by its Principal M.Amrender Reddy S/o. Tirupathi Reddy and others ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 A.P.State Council for Higher Education Rep. by its Secretary R/o. Saifabad Hyderabad. and others .....RESPONDENT(S) THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16751 of 2005 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioners, who are the petitioners in W.P.Nos.9874 and 15168 of 2005, where notices were ordered and the matters are pending before this Court, with an allegation that the first respondent has appointed the second Inspection Team for inspecting the proposed colleges established by respondents 2 and 3, which is contrary to the Rules and therefore, sought to interdict the proceedings of the first respondent. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners pressed for an interim order on the ground that if permission is granted in favour of respondents 2 and 3, the present writ petition would become infructuous and therefore sought for appropriate orders. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent and also the Caveator for the second respondent, who stated that the papers are served on him just now. 4. As the issue of granting permission for starting Unaided Private Degree Colleges in favour of respondents 2 and 3 is still pending before the first respondent and the petitioners have already filed two writ petitions, which are pending before this Court, this Court is not inclined to pass any orders at this stage. As no orders are passed in favour of respondents 2 and 3 violating the Rules or any other judgment, the allegation made by the petitioners that the official respondent is acting contrary to the Rules framed by the Government, cannot be gone into at this stage. If ultimately any orders are passed in favour of respondents 2 and 3 granting permission, it is open to the petitioners to question the same. 5 . Therefore, the present writ petition is premature and the same is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. ___________________ S. Ananda Reddy, J Date: 29.07.2005 va