IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.11901 of 2006 Dated: August 1, 2006 Between: Ushodaya High School, Vinayak Nagar, Shaikpet, Hyderabad, rep. by its Correspondent V. Srisailam, S/o. Narasinga Rao, aged about 39 years, R/o.8-1-68/A/119, Vinayak Nagar, Shaikpet, Hyderabad. … Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Education Dept., Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad, and others. … Respondents Order: This writ petition has been filed seeking Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not granting permission and recognition to the petitioner, a school located in Hyderabad. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. The petitioner, a High School located in Shaikpet, Hyderabad, was established in the year 1995 by the ‘Ushodaya Educational Society’ , a society registered under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Public Societies Registration Act. The case of the petitioner is that though it had applied to the respondents for grant of permission/recognition by complying all the requisite conditions as per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982 (‘the Act’ for brevity) and the rules made thereunder, the same has been rejected on the ground that the academic year is already over. 4. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the petitioner has failed to comply the requisite conditions for grant of permission; hence, the case of the petitioner was rejected. 5. This Court by order dated 19-06-2006, permitted the petitioner to send fresh proposals to the respondents by complying all the requisite conditions and directed the respondents to consider the same and pass appropriate orders. 6. Today, when the matter has been taken up, the learned Government Pleader produced a copy of the orders dated 07-07-2006 (wrongly typed as 07-06-2006) whereby the proposals for P.T.O. classes I to VII during the year 2007-08 in respect of the petitioner school have been examined and the same were rejected pointing out certain omissions. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain omissions as pointed out by the respondents by the orders dated 07-07-2006, are without any basis and the petitioner is prepared to comply the other conditions. 8. As much as the proposals submitted by the petitioner have been rejected and communicated to the petitioner, I dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents with reference to the omissions pointed out in the orders dated 07-07-2006 and to comply other requisite conditions as per the provisions of the Act and the rules made thereunder. If the petitioner complies the omissions as pointed out by the respondents, and all other necessary formalities, the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner for grant of recognition. 9. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________________ JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY. August 1, 2006 MRR