THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 17305 of 2009 Oral order: The petitioner, assailing the action of respondent Nos.1 to 4 in permitting respondent No.5 – Society to establish a school next to the school run by them, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the orders issued by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.1, Education (P.S.2), dated 01.01.1994, has filed the present writ petition. According to the petitioner, while granting permission for establishment of new schools, respondent Nos.1 to 4 must keep in mind the need to avoid unhealthy competition among the schools in the locality as provided in Rule 4(1)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Establishment, Recognition, Administration and Control of Schools under Private Managements) Rules, 1993 (for short “the Rules”) issued by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.1, dated 01.01.1994, but it is the grievance of the petitioner that respondent Nos.1 to 4, without considering this aspect of the matter have permitted respondent No.5 to establish a school where the petitioner is presently running a school, which is illegal and arbitrary. The learned Government Pleader for Education appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 submitted that the Government, issued orders in G.O. Ms. No.74, (SC PS1), dated 11.09.2006 amending Rule 4(1)(b) of the Rules by deleting the same. He submitted that as per Rule 4(1)(a) of the Rules, grant of permission for establishment of new schools is considered based on the educational needs of the locality, the population of the school–going children in the locality and the coverage of the existing schools, and inasmuch as respondent Nos.1 to 4 considered this aspect of the matter and permitted respondent No.5 to establish a new school in the place where the petitioner is also running a school, no exception can be taken thereto. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Education for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Though the petitioner is questioning the action of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in granting permission to respondent No.5 to establish a new school at the place where the petitioner is presently running a school as being contrary to Rule 4(1)(b) of the Rules, the fact remains, the Government, vide orders issued in G.O. Ms. No.74, (SC PS1), dated 11.09.2006 amended Rule 4(1)(b) of the Rules by deleting the same, and since the said Rule is no more in force, the petitioner cannot place any reliance thereon to challenge the action of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in granting permission to respondent No.5 to establish a new school at the place where the petitioner is presently running a school. Be that as it may, it is the case of respondent Nos.1 to 4 that permission was granted to respondent No.5 to establish a new school considering the educational needs of the locality, the population of the school–going children in the locality and the coverage of the existing schools as provided in Rule 4(1(a) of the Rules, and that being so, no exception can be taken to the action of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in granting permission to the petitioner to establish a new school at the place where the petitioner is presently running a school. In the above view of the matter, there is no merit in the writ petition, and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 21st August, 2009 KSR