IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 758 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 17/06/2008 in WP NO : 23240 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: K. Rama Sastry, S/o. Subrahmanyam, Private Managmenet Aided Elementary School (KS), Battiprolu Village & Mandal, Guntur District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, School Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Director of School Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 3 The District Educational Officer, Guntur, Guntur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:PARTY-IN-PERSON Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 758 of 2008 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ appeal is filed by the petitioner against the order of the learned single Judge passed in W.P.No:23240 of 2007 on 17.6.2008. The appellant herein is the writ petitioner. He filed the writ petition seeking to set aside the order of the 2nd respondent in Rc.No:1322/B1- 3/2006, dated 3.10.2007 and the order of the 3rd respondent in Rc.No:17578(C5)(C4)C9/99, dated 27.4.2007. The learned single Judge having observed that the District Educational Officer has considered the report and proceeded to exercise the jurisdiction conferred on him under G.O.Ms.No:103, Education, dated 5.8.2005 and the petitioner was given fair opportunity by the competent authority and there is no controversy with regard to the steep fall in the strength of the pupil and the actual attendance of the pupil in the year 2006-2007 is 13 and thereby, the school has become unviable, dismissed the writ petition. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ appeal is filed by the writ petitioner. Heard the writ petitioner-party in person and the learned G.P. for School Education and perused the entire material available on record. The facts born out from the material on record, go to show that due to the steep fall of pupil roll from the year 1998-99 onwards step by step, the 3rd respondent issued proceedings, dated 27.4.2007 ordering closure of the school and withdrawing permanent recognition from the academic year 2007-2008 and the said proceedings were challenged in W.P.No:11247 of 2007 wherein the petitioner was directed to work out his statutory remedy available under section 89 of A.P. Education Act and on the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner, the 3rd respondent vide proceedings dated 3.10.2007 dismissed the claim of the petitioner. On that, the present writ petition is preferred by the petitioner. The material on record goes to show that the strength of the school has gone down and 5 Men Committee came to be appointed and basing on the report submitted by it, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner under the provisions of the Act as to why the school in question should not be closed. Apart from that, the report of the 5 Men Committee and the inspection report of the Regional Joint Commissioner, make it crystal clear that the present strength of the pupil on the whole is 17 and the effective attendance of the pupil is 13. As a consequence of the said circumstances, the District Educational Officer keeping in view the guidelines issued under G.O.Ms.No:103, Education, dated 5.8.2005 shifted those three aided posts along with incumbents to some other schools. Apart that, the appeal as well as the revision filed by the petitioner against the order of the District Educational Officer, ended in dismissal. The report of the 5 Men Committee as to the steep fall of the pupil from the year 1998-1999 to 2006-2007, is not in dispute. In this background of the matter coupled with the provisions of the Act, We feel that the order of the learned single Judge, does not warrant any interference by this Court. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the institution in question has been started long back, We feel it a fit case wherein liberty can be granted to the petitioner to apply for permission seeking to start a new school along with grant in aid. The order of the learned single Judge, is modified to that effect. Subject to the above modification, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. ________________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ___________________________ Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar Dated: 30th March, 2009 gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 758 of 2008 (Order of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) 30th March, 2009