THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.967 of 2010 Dated 31st August, 2010 Between: Affiliated Private Junior College Managements Association. …Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary, and others. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri V. Venugopala Rao Counsel for respondent No.2: Kum. C. Sindhu Kumari, standing counsel for Board of Intermediate Education Assistant The Court made the following: ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 23.03.2010 in W.P.M.P.No.8395 of 2010 in W.P.No.6505 of 2010. In the writ petition filed by the petitioner herein, this Court, while issuing notices to the respondents, directed the official respondents to ensure that respondent Nos.4 to 7, the private respondents impleaded in the writ petition, shall not run the colleges without recognition and necessary approvals from the competent authority. Alleging that despite the said order, the private respondents are being permitted to run the colleges, the petitioner filed the present contempt case. In response to the notice ordered by this, respondent No.2 filed a counter-affidavit, wherein he has stated as under: “5. It is further submitted that the 2nd respondent i.e., the Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education, Andhra Pradesh herein has received four applications from the management of Narayana Educational Institutions for starting of Private Unaided Junior Colleges in the above mentioned four places in response to the Notification issued by this 2nd respondent, i.e., the Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education, Andhra Pradesh inviting applications for starting of new Junior Colleges during 2010-11. These applications will be processed and permission for starting of Junior Colleges will be considered in accordance with the Rules framed by the Government/Board of Intermediate Education. Till such time the management will not be permitted to make admissions and if the management violates the Rules and makes admissions, disciplinary action is being initiated separately against release of pamphlets by the management. Hence the contention of the petitioner that no action has been taken by the 2nd and 3rd respondents is not correct. 6. With reference to paras 7, 8 and 9 it is submitted that the students and the parents of the locality where the colleges are proposed to be started were informed through press note dated 12th June, 2010 published in all the news editions on 14th June, 2010 that the parents should not admit their wards in the above four colleges. Basing on the complaint submitted by the petitioner the 3rd respondent, RIO, BIE, Eluru has issued show-cause notices to the managements who are respondents 4 to 7 on 19th June, 2010. The 3rd respondent i.e., RIO, BIE, Eluruhas seized the Narayana Junior Colleges at Palakol and Tanuku vide letter dated 22.07.2010 and 28.07.2010. As stated above the action is being taken against the management and the management will not be allowed to make admissions during 2010-11 without issuing sanction orders to the management to run the colleges and the 3rd respondent herein will follow the orders dated 23.03.2010 issued by the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. in W.P.M.P.No.8395 of 2010 in W.P.No.6505 of 2010. 7. With reference to para 10 of the affidavit, it is submitted that the 2nd respondent i.e., the Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education, Andhra Pradesh has followed the interim directions in W.P.M.P.8395 of 2010 in W.P.No.6505 of 2010 issued by the Hon’ble High Court. Accordingly, the Narayana Junior Colleges at Palakol and Tanuku were seized by the respondent No.3 (RIO) and show-cause notice issued to the management of Narayana Junior Colleges at Jangareddygudem and Tadepalligudem who are respondents No.4 to 7. The 2nd respondent, Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education, Andhra Pradesh has issued directions to all the RIOs in the State vide letter dated 14.05.2010 that if any management makes admissions in anticipation of sanction of Junior College into 1st year Intermediate, complaint may be lodged in the Police Station by the RIO concerned and the building may be seized. Further, the managements were informed that their proposal for sanction a Junior College shall not be considered, if they violate the Rules of Board of Intermediate Education/Government.“ From the averments referred to above, it is evident that necessary action, though belated, is taken against the private colleges. In view of the assurance given by the Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education that till the permissions are accorded those private colleges will not be permitted to run, the Contempt Case is closed, however, with liberty to the petitioner to seek revival of the contempt if respondent No.1 – Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education shows any laxity in taking appropriate action in future. As a sequel to closure of the Contempt Case, C.A.No.620 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 31st August, 2010 GHN