HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.15190 of 2010 Date: 09-11-2011 Between Sri Vidya Niketan, Arepalli Muppala village, Ipur Mandal, Guntur district, Rep. by D.Chandrasekhar … Petitioner and The Commissioner & Director of School Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and 2 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.15190 of 2010 Order: Heard Sri N.Subba Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Education appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. 2. The petitioner is an unregistered tutorial institution. It has filed this writ petition seeking a Writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in closing down the institution in pursuance of the letter of the District Educational Officer, Guntur district, the 2nd respondent herein, vide L.Dis.No.4040/A5/(A2)/2009, dated 07-6-2010, as illegal. 3. The case of the petitioner is that it is running a tutorial institution for giving tuitions to the students of primary and upper primary level and imparting coaching to prepare the students to appear for entrance examinations and competitive examinations. Therefore, the respondents have no right to insist upon the petitioner to get the institution registered. 4. I have considered the said contention with reference to the rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.200 Education (Ser.V), dated 06-8-1997, namely, the Andhra Pradesh Tutorial Institutions (Registration and Regulation) Rules, 1997 (for short “the Rules”). The said Rules apply to all the tutorial institutions. Section 2(f) defines “tutorial institutions’ as any institution whether residential or not, imparting coaching of the type of education mentioned under Rule 1(3) of the Rules. The said Rules are applicable to the following categories of tutorial institution: (a) un-recognised schools and colleges imparting coaching to students in various classes or courses and send them to appear for the relevant public examinations to be conducted by recognised bodies or Universities as private external candidates; (b) institutions imparting coaching to prepare students to appear for entrance examinations for admission to the various courses of study or to prepare them for competitive examinations to be held for recruitment to various categories of posts in public services; and (c) institutions imparting education, and or training in any branch (technical or non-technical) of study, such as arts, commerce and science adopting their own system of coaching and syllabus or as prescribed by any recognised University or authority and awarding diplomas or certificates of proficiency to the students on the completion of the training or course of study either by subjecting them to an examination or without such examination or any other as defined by the Government. 5. A perusal of the aforesaid Rules shows that the institution of the petitioner falls under the category of “tutorial institution” and the same requires registration under Rule 5 of the Rules. Admittedly, the petitioner has not been registered. 6. The learned counsel, however, submits that the petitioner is entitled for a notice before seeking closure of the institution. 7. I am of the view that in a case of this nature, where institutions are run without registration or recognition and in the admitted fact scenario that the petitioner has not obtained registration, it is not entitled for any prior notice. It is true that reliance is placed on the orders of this Court in W.P.No.25936 of 2009 and batch, dated 01- 12-2009. In the instant case, since I have taken the view that the petitioner is not entitled for notice in the admitted fact scenario, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought for. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission. Consequently, the interim order granted on 30-6-2010 shall stand vacated. No costs. ___________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 09th November, 2011. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.15190 of 2010 09th November, 2011. (Ak)