THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.13060 of 2010 Dated:22nd June, 2010 Between: M/s. Shirdi Sai Tutorials, rep. by its Correspondent G.Kamalakar Rao, Nellimukku, Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam. ….Petitioner and 1. The Deputy Educational Officer, Visakhapatnam and others. …Respondents **** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.13060 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition has been filed by M/s. Shirdi Sai Tutorials represented by its Correspondent G.Kamalakar Rao with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Rc.No.64/4/10, dated 00-05- 2010 issued by the Deputy Educational Officer, Visakhapatnam-1st respondent, as arbitrary and illegal. 2. This is the second journey of the petitioner to this Court. Earlier the petitioner filed W.P.No.25961 of 2009 assailing the action of the respondents in trying to close the petitioner’s tutorial institution. The said writ petition along with other writ petitions came to be disposed of on 01.12.2009. Relevant portion of the order reads as hereunder: “The establishment of tutorial institutions is not prohibited under law. On the other hand, the Government framed rules for registration and regulation of such institutions. The order passed by this Court in W.P.No.11007 of 2009 and batch is in respect of unrecognized schools. Firstly, the petitioners do not answer the description of schools. Secondly, even assuming that the petitioners are indulging in any activity contrary to law, they can be proceeded against, only after issuance of show cause notice. No such steps were taken. Hence, the writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed not to interfere with the activity of imparting informal tutorial education by the petitioners. It shall however, be open to them to issue notice and take further action in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.” The Deputy Educational Officer, Visakhapatnam-1st respondent issued proceedings in Rc.No.64/4/10, dated 00-05-2010, directing the petitioner to close the school on or before 20.05.2010. Hence, this Writ Petition by the petitioner. 3. When the Writ Petition came up for admission, learned Government Pleader for School Education takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for School Education appearing for the respondents. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner tutorial institution does not answer the description of school and therefore, the proceedings issued by the 1st respondent is liable to be set aside so far as the petitioner tutorial institution is concerned. He further submits that the 1st respondent issued the proceedings in Rc.No.64/4/10, dated 00-05-2010 without calling for explanation of the petitioner tutorial institution. 6. As seen from the proceedings issued by the 1st respondent, no notice seems to have been issued to the petitioner before passing the impugned proceedings. In that view of the matter, the proceedings in Rc.No.64/4/10, dated 00-05-2010 issued by the 1st respondent is to be treated as show-cause notice enabling the petitioner to submit his explanation within two weeks and thereafter, the authority shall pass appropriate orders within two weeks. Till the explanation of the petitioner is disposed of, the proposed action is kept in abeyance. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:22nd June, 2010. cs THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.13060 of 2010 Dated:22nd June, 2010