THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13834 of 2005 Date: 01.08.2005 Between: K. Sudarshana Rao, Manager and Correspondent, Good Shepherd Residential Elementary and High Schools, Vanapalle gudem, Tadepalligudem, West Godvari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra pradesh, rep by its Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13834 of 2005 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the inaction of the third respondent in disposing of his representation dated 02.05.2005 to recognize him as the Correspondent of GSR Elementary School, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District, as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. 2. It is stated that the petitioner started Good Shepherd Residential Elementary School in the year 1970 at Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District with his own funds. Subsequently, it was upgraded as ‘Upper Primary School’ in the year 1977. The School was recognized by the first respondent and admitted into grant-in-aid. It was further upgraded as ‘High School’ in the year 1994. Both the Primary School as well as the High School have been running separately in separate buildings. The petitioner, being the founder of the Schools, was acting as a Manager and Correspondent of the Schools. But, however, by creating some false documents, one AE Mission, Eluru/AE Mission, Andhra Pradesh, has recommended for change of Correspondentship of the petitioner by appointing one K.Prabhakara Rao and the said K.Prabhakara Rao, obtained orders from the third respondent as Correspondent of the above Elementary School. Similarly, the fourth respondent also obtained orders from the third respondent as the Correspondent of the School behind the back of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation to the third respondent on 02.05.2005 giving all the details and to recognize him as the Correspondent of Good Shepherd Residential Elementary School, Tadepalligudem. Though the said representation was received by the third respondent on 09.05.2005, no action has been taken by him. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Education. 4. As the representation of the petitioner dated 02.05.2005 was not disposed of by the third respondent, it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the third respondent to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of at the admission stage. ___________________ S. Ananda Reddy, J Date: 01.08.2005 va