IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 317 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 24/10/2008 in WP NO : 17090 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: B.Ratnamba, D/o. apparao, R/o. door No.3-11-53/2 Rama Krishna Nivas, IV c, Sri Ram Nagar, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 P.Jardhana Rao, S/o. P.Koteswara Rao, And Ex.Correspondent of Sri Victoria Aided, U.P. School Society and Present Managing Committee Member, R/o. H.No.24-11-6/2 Weavers Colony, Rajahmundry, Est Godavari District. 2 The Government of A.P. Rep by Principal Secretary, Education (SEPS II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The Director of School Education, Hyderabad. 4 Sri Victoria Aided U.P.School, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, Rep by its Correspondent. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: SRI C.V.R.RUDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR 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 :317 of 2009 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Smt Justice T. Meena Kumari) This appeal is filed against the order, dated 24.10.2008 passed by the learned single Judge in WVMP No.3126 of 2008 and WPMP No.22177 of 2008 in WP No.17090 of 2008. The appellant herein is the 5th respondent and the 1st respondent herein is the petitioner in the above writ petition. For the sake of convenience, the status of the parties will hereinafter be referred to as arrayed in the writ petition. The writ petitioner filed the above writ petition challenging Memo No.203/SE.PS.II/A/1/2008, dated 4.7.2008 issued by the Government of A.P. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was retired as H.M. and Correspondent of the 4th respondent-school and then, the 5th respondent was appointed as Head Mistress of the School and the Government failed to accord approval to the 5th respondent for the post of Head Mistress of the 4th respondent-school and subsequently, as per the interim direction of this Court in WP No.525/2003, the 5th respondent was made to act as Head Mistress I/c Incharge to the 4th respondent school temporarily until further orders and that since there were some disputes between the correspondent of the 4th respondent- school and the 5th respondent, the said Correspondent sent a proposal to the DEO, East Godavari with a false resolution of the management of the school that the management is willing to surrender the post with person i.e., 5th respondent. It is the main grievance that if the 5th respondent is transferred along with the aided post to NSBA, UP School, Rajahmundry, the 4th respondent-school will become handicapped. Along with the writ petition, the writ petitioner also filed WPMP No.22177 of 2008 seeking suspension of operation of the Memo dated 4.7.2008. While admitting the above writ petition, on 7.8.2008 the learned single Judge granted interim suspension as sought for. Having aggrieved by the same, the 5th respondent filed the above WVMP seeking to vacate the said interim order on the ground that as a result of interim order, she is not allowed to enjoy the benefit accrued under the impugned order dated 4.7.2008. The learned single Judge made the interim order absolute and dismissed the WVMP. Having aggrieved by the same, the 5th respondent filed the present appeal. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that on 13.3.2009, while suspending the interim order passed on 7.8.2008 in WPMP No.22177 of 2008, this Court has directed the appellant to report at NSBA school, Rajahmundry within a period of one week from today and report compliance of the order to this Court. Now, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant before us is that the appellant had already been relieved from the 4th respondent-School and the authorities of NSBA school are not allowing her to join. In view of the fact that the issue involved is a question of fact, which has to be adjudicated on production of evidence before the appropriate forum, we feel that the appellant is at liberty to avail the remedies that are open under law. Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ___________________________ Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar Dated: 28th April, 2009 nn THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO :317 of 2009 (Judgment of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Smt Justice T. Meena Kumari) 28th April, 2009