IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 15759 of 2001 BETWEEN: Seven Hills Aided Upper Primary School, Rep. by its Correspondent, G. Vidyasagar Reddy, S/o. G. Sivarami Reddy, Hanuman Nagar, Proddatur, Cuddapah District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Director of School Education, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. 2 The District Educational Officer, Cuddapah. 3 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not admitting the posts i.e., 2 B.Ed. Assistants; 1 S.G. Assistant; 1 Telugu Pandit Grade-II and 1 Hindu Pandit Grade-II, of the petitioner-School to grant- in-aid as per the recommendations of the second respondent dated 20.1.1998, as illegal, improper, arbitrary, discriminatory and motivated and further direct the respondents to admit the said posts to grant-in-aid and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.UMAPATHY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner – Upper Primary School questions the action of the first respondent/Director of School Education, in not taking necessary action pursuant to the proposals sent by the District Educational Officer, Cuddapah vide his letter 20.01.1998 recommending for admission of 2 B.Ed. Assistants; one S.G. Assistant; one Telugu Pandit Grade – II and one Hindi Pandit Grade – II in the petitioner – school into grant-in-aid. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner – Seven Hills Aided Upper Primary School was established in the year 1985-86 as per the proceedings in Rc.No.50/A4/84 dated 06.02.1986 of the District Educational Officer and subsequently it was upgraded as Upper Primary School. Thereafter, the then District Educational Officer issued proceedings in Rc.No.51/A4/94 dated 28.03.1994 sanctioning 5 SG Assistants posts for classes I to V classes (unaided to the petitioner-school) for the academic year 1993-94. It is also not in dispute that as per the orders of the Government the selected posts can be admitted to grant-in-aid in respect of the schools, which were established after 01.04.1977 and existing as on 01.09.1985. It is also admitted that the proposals for admission of the five sanctioned SGT posts for admission into grant-in-aid was also recommended by the District Educational Officer vide proceedings in Rc.No.463/A2/98 dated 20.01.1998 to the Director of School Education. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Director of School Education has not taken any steps pursuant to the aforesaid proposals of the District Educational Officer recommending for admission of 5 SGT posts into grant-in-aid into the petitioner-school. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that there cannot be any justification on the part of the first respondent in sleeping over the matter from 1998 till date. Accordingly, the first respondent is directed to take appropriate further steps pursuant to the aforesaid recommendation of the District Educational Officer vide Rc.No.463/A2/98 dated 20.01.1998 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J July 29, 2008 DSK