Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Adithya Junior College vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 23 August, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT APPEAL NO: 536. 537 OF 2024 AND W.P. NO.12220 OF 2024
WRIT APPEAL NO: 536 OF 2024 ^
Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order.
dt.10.05.2024 in W.P.No.1379 of 2023 on the file of the High Court. ^
Between;
Adithya Junior College Established under by B.S. Educational Society, Rep.
, S/0.Late
by its Secretary and Correspondent. Vempadapu Satyanarayana
R/o.D.No.14-19, Sivaram Junction,
Surappala Naidu, Aged about 43 years
Cheepurupalli, Vizianagaram District.
...Appellant/Review Petitioner-
AND
1. SriAkshara Junior College, Sivaram Road, Cheepurupalli,
Vizianagaram District, Rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent Sri
S.Kasi Babu S/o.Venkata Ramana, Aged about 34 years,
2. Sri Gayatri Junior College, Kaspa's Street, Cheepurupalli, Vizianagaram
Dasari Siva
District, Rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent Sri
Prasada Rao, S/o. Papi Naidu, Aged about 41 years.
2
3. Srinivasa Junior College, Kotha Agraharam, Cheepurupalli,
Vizianagaram District, Rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent Sri
ADNSV Prasad, S/o.A. Narasimham, Aged about 4 years,_
4. Sri Balaji Junior College, Near SBI Bank, Cheepurupalli, Vizianagaram
District., Rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent Sri Yellanti Venu,
S/o.Sanjeeva Rao, Aged about 40 years, ^
5. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary School
Education Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur-
District.
6. The Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education, Amaravati
Vijayawada, A.P
...Respondents/ Respondents
lA NO: 2 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to direct the official respondents 5 and 6 to allow the
petitioner/appellant to conduct classes of 1st and 2nd year intermediate,
pending disposal of the main writ appeal.
iA NO: 3 OF 2024 '
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the operation of the order, 10.05.2024 in Review
I.A.No.2 of 2023 in W.P.No.1379 of 2023, pending disposal of the main Writ
Appeal.
Counsel for the Appellant(s) : SRI M PITCHAIAH
3
Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 4 : SRI VIJAY MATHUKUMILLI..,
Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION
Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : SRI N RAJA RAJESWAR REDDY, SC _
FOR BIE
WRIT APPEAL NO: 537 OF 2024
Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order, dt.
28.06.2023 in W.P.No.1379 of 2023 on the file of the High Court. --
Between:
Adithya Junior College, Established by B.S. Educational Society, Rep. by its
Secretary and Correspondent. Vempadapu Satyanarayana, S/o.Late
Surappala Naidu, Aged about 43 years, R/o.D.No.14-19, Sivaram Junction,
Cheepurupalli Vizianagaram District.
...Appellant/3'^'^ Respondent
AND
1. Sri Akshara Junior College, Sivaram Road. Cheepurupalli,
Vizianagaram District, Rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent Sri
S.Kasi Babu, S/o.Venkata Ramana, Aged about 34 years,
2. Sri Gayatri Junior College, Kaspa's Street, Cheepurupalli, Vizianagaram
District, Rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent Sri Dasari Siva
Prasada Rao, S/o.Papi Naidu, Aged about 41 years.
3. Srinivasa Junior College, Kotha Agraharam, Cheepurupalli,
Vizianagaram District., Rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent Sri
ADNSV Prasad S/o.A.Narasimham, Aged about 46 years.
4 .
4. Sri Balaji Junior College, NearSBI Bank, Cheepurupalli, Vizianagaram
District., Rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent Sri Yellanti Venu
S/o.Sanjeeva Rao, Aged about 40 years.
...Respondents/Writ Petitioners
5. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, School
Education Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur
District.
6. The Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education, Amaravati,
Vijayawada, A.P.
...Respondents/ Respondents ^ & 2^
lA NO: 3 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to direct the official respondents 5 and 6 to allow the
petitioner/appellant to conduct classes of 1st and 2nd year Intermediate,
pending disposal of the main writ appeal.^
lA NO: 4 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the operation of the order dt. 28.06.2023, in
W.P.No.1379 of 2023, pending disposal of the main Writ Appeal..^
Counsel for the Appellant{s) : SRI M PITCHAIAH
Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 4 : SRI VIJAY MATHUKUMILLI
Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION
5
Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : SRI N RAJA RAJESWAR REDDY, Se
FOR BIE
WRIT PETITION NO: 12220 OF 2024
Between:
Adithya Junior College, Established by B.S. Educational Society, Rep. by its
Secretary and Correspondent. Vempadapu Satyanarayana, S/o.Late
Surappala Naidu, Aged about 43 years, R/o.D.No.14-19, Sivaram Junction,
Cheepurupalti, Vizianagaram District.
...PETITIONER^
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, School
Education Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur
District.
2. Board of Intermediate Education, Rep. by its Secretary, Amaravati,
Vijayawada, A.P.
\
...RESPONDENTS;^
Petition under Article 22^of the Constitution of India praying that in
the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the
nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned Order/Proceedings in
Rc.No.24107/Acad/2022-23, dt.29.05.2024, of the 2nd respondent,
disaffiliating the petitioner college, as arbitrary, violative of Articles 14,
'•9('I)(9) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the
same and grant costs of the proceedings. ^
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
6
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the operation of the impugned Order/Proceedin gs, in
RcNo.24107/ Acad / 2022-23, dt.29.05.2024, of the 2nd respondent,
pending disposal of the main writ petition.
lA NO: 2 OF 2024 .
Petition under Section 161 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner college to carry on
admission of students in various courses of Intermediate in the petitioner
college, pending hearing in the writ petition.^
Counsel for the Petltioner(s): SRI. M PITCHAIAH ,
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION
Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI N RAJA RAJESWAR REDDY, SO
FOR BIE
The Court made the following; COMMON ORDER
1
Ha & n;s, j
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
&WP 12220 of 2024
APHC010244712024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3443]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
23rd DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT APPEAL Nosi 536, 537 of 2024
&?
W.P.No. 12220 of 2024
W.A.No.536 of 2024
Between:
Adithya Junior College ...APPELLANT
AND
Sri Akshara Junior College and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellants:
l.M.PITCHAIAH
Comisel for the Respondent(S):
l.GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION
2.N RAJA RAJESWARA REDDY(STANDING COUNSEL FOR BIE)
3. SRI VIJAY MATHUKUMILLI
2
HQ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
COMMON JUDGMENT
DT: 25.08.2024
(Per NinaJa Jayasurya, J)
The writ appellant-Aditya Junior College / 3''d respondent in
W.P.No.1379 of 2023, aggrieved by the Orders dated 28.06.2023 passed
by the learned Single Judge in allowing the said writ petition, filed Writ
Appeal No.537 of 2024. Against the orders dated 10.05.2024 dismissing
the Review Petition, the said College filed Writ Appeal No.536 of 2024.
2. Challenging the proceedings of disaffiliation of the College, dated
29.05.2024 as a consequence of the orders under challenge in the Writ
Appeals, it filed W.P.No. 12220 of 2024.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed
in W.P.No. 1379 of 2023.
Brief facts:
4. The writ petitioners are junior colleges located in Cheepurupalli of
Vizianagaram District and imparting education to the intermediate
students. Initially, they filed W.P.No.18717 of 2022 aggrieved by the
purported action of the Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education / 2^^
respondent to grant permission to one "Sri Aditya Junior College"
established by "Sri Sai Sahaisra Educational Society" to shift the said
college from Garividi Village, Vizianagaram District to Cheepurupalli
3
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220of 2024
Village, without following due procedure of Law. A leanned Single Judge
vide orders dated 04.07.2022, granted an interim direction to the 2"^
respondent not to grant permission to the said "Sri Aditya Junior
College" for shifting from Garividi Village &■ Mandal to Cheepurupalli
Village (ScMandaJ.
5. Subsequently, another Educational Society i.e., "B.S.Educational
Society" which was registered on 01.08.2022, made a representation to
the then Hon'ble Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha), Vizianagaram
Constituency on 13.08.2022 stating that it is interested in establishing
a new junior college in Cheepiirupalli under the said Society and sought
permission for the same. The Hon'ble Member of Parliament on the
same day i.e. 13.08.2022 addressed a letter to the Hon'ble Minister for
Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh with a request to issue
necessary permission positively. ThereaJter the Board of Intermediate
Education vide Communication dated 27.08.2022 called for a
Comprehensive Inspection Committee (CIC) detailed report and viability
report for sanction of new private unaided General Junior College at
Cheepurupalh Village, Vizianagaram District from the academic year
2022-23.
6. While so, the petitioners aggrieved by the purported action of the
2"'i respondent in taking steps to grant permission to establish a new
Junior College at Cheepurupalli by the said "B.S.Educational Society",
4
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
filed W.P.No.35328 of 2022 and a learned Judge of this Court, by an
Order dated 01.11.2022 directed the production of records. Thereafter,
on submission of reports, the 1st respondent-Government vide Memo
dated 16.11.2022 rejected the request of the "B.S.Educational Society"
on the premise that there is no viability for establishment of a new
private un-aided junior college at Cheepurupalli and three writ petitions
filed against the request of the management are pending before the High
Court.
7.
However, the Government issued G.O.Rt.No.l dated 02.01.2023,
according permission to the "B.S.Educational Society" for establishment
of a new private un-aided junior college in the name of "Aditya Junior
CoUege", from the academic year 2022-2023.
8.
The petitioners vzJe W.P.No.l379 of 2023, laid a challenge to the
said G.O., inter alia contending that without sending record to the
Hon'ble High Court as per the directions dated 01.11.2022 in
W.P.No.35328 of 2022 and despite the rejection of permission vide
Memo dated 16.11.2022, the l®'^ respondent without verification of
records, issued the G.O., for establishment of the junior college from the
academic year 2022-23, although the academic year was already
completed, that Rule 4 (2) of the A.P.Educational Institutions
(Establishment, Recognition, Administration and Control of Institutions
5
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
&WP 12220 of 2024
of Higher Education) Rules, 1987 (for short 'the Rules, 1987) was
violated.
9. The 2'^'! respondent filed a counter-affidavit setting out the factual
aspects including the issuance of a Show Cause Notice to the
management of "Sri Aditya Junior College" established by 'Sri Sai
Sahasra Educational Society' and imposition of penalty of Rs.5 lakhs for
unauthorized shifting of college from GarivLdi Mandal to Cheepurupalh
Mandal, sans prior permission from the competent authority. No
reference was made to the Government Memo dated 16.11.2022
rejecting the permission for establishment of a junior college by
B.S.Educational Society". Yet, the subsequent order i.e., G.O.Rt.No.l
dated 02.01.2023 is sought to be justified stating that to curb the
monopoly of the existing private junior colleges, to create healthy
competition among the institutions and considering the requests from
the residents of the local area to cater educational needs of the people in
the neeirby Mandals and as no such applications were received from any
other management to establish a new junior coUege in the said region,
the Government felt it necessary to permit the management of
B.S.Educational Society" to establish a new private un-aided junior
college in the name of "Aditya Junior CoUege" at Cheepurupalh from the
academic year 2022-23.
6
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
10. The learned Single Judge, after due consideration of the matter,
while holding that Rule 4(2) of the Rules, 1987 was violated, opined
that the G.O.Rt.No.l dated 02.01.2023 is based on political
recommendations, set aside the same and allowed the writ petition vide
Orders dated 28.06.2023. Seeking review of the said orders, the
respondent filed I.A.No.2 of 2023. The learned Judge after hearing the
review petitioner-respondent No.3 and referring to the legal precedents,
dismissed the review petition by an Order dated 10.05.2024.
11.
In the light of the above mentioned orders of the learned Single
Judge, the 2nd respondent issued Proceedings dated 29.05.2024, the
relevant portion of which reads as follows:
"In consequence of the orders of the Hon'ble High Court in
W.P.No.1379 of 2023 and review petitions I.A.No.2 and LA.No.4, it is
hereby ordered to disaffiliate Aditya Junior College, at D.No.14-19,
Sy.No. 113/14, 15, Sivam Junction, Opp: APSWR (G) Jr.CoUege,
Cheepurupalli, Vizianagaram District managed by B.S.Educational Society,
Cheepurupalli (V&M), Vizianagaram District and directed the
management to handover all the records to the Principal, GVR &■ SKS
Govt.Junior CoUege, Cheepurupalh, Vizianagaram District and also issue
TC's to the second year students.
The Regional Inspection Officer, Vizianagaram is directed to give
vide publicity regarding the status of the college to the students and
parents. Guide the second-year students to join in nearby colleges."
7
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
&WP 12220 of 2024
Contentions of the counsel:
12. Mr.Pitchaiah, learned counsel for the respondent-appellant
College made submissions, inter alia, that the writ petition itself is not
maintainable at the behest of the rival colleges. He submits that the
appellant-"Aditya Junior College" was established by "B.S.Educational
Society" and it has nothing to do with "Sri Aditya Junior College" which
was established by the Management of "Sri Sai Sahasra Educational
Society" and the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate that the same
are different entities and erroneously came to a conclusion that the
unauthorized act of relocation of the college was resorted to by
renaming the said "Sri Aditya Junior College" as "Aditya Junior College
and as if it being run by the "B.S.Educational Society". He submits that
the order of the learned Single Judge basing on Rule 4 (2) of Rules 1987
without considering Section 18 of the A.P.Education Act which
empowers the Government to grant permission for establishment of an
Educational Institution, is not tenable. The learned counsel would
further contend that right to impart education is a right guaranteed
under Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and permission
granted to the 3'''^ respondent College cannot be invalidated on any
grounds, much less on the premise that it's establishment at
Cheepurupalli is likely to lead to imhealthy competition.
8
HQ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
13. The learned counsel states that about 198 students are pursuing
the second year intermediate course in the 3rd respondent College, that
when compared to the other colleges at Cheepurupalli, the pass
percentage in the 3rd respondent College is more. He submits that unless
orders under challenge are set aside and the 3rd respondent College is
allowed to function, serious prejudice and irreparable loss would be
caused not only to the College, but also to the students who are pursuing
the intermediate course. He places reliance on the decisions of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jasbhai Motibhai Desai v. Roshan Kumari
and Order dated 25.09.2023 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in
W.A.No.932 of 2023 (M/s.Galaxy Restaurant &? Bar and M/s.New
Modern Restaurant 8e Bar) and T.M.A.Pai Foundation v. State of
Karnataka^. The learned counsel also refers to the decision of a Co
ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.33168 of 2018, dated
29.08.2019(Vigneswar Educational Society v. State of Andhra
Pradesh).
14. Opposing the said submissions, the learned counsel for the writ
petitioners contended that the orders passed by the learned Single
Judge contain valid and cogent reasons and warrants no interference in
an intra-court appeal. Referring to the earlier writ petitions filed by the
petitioners more particularly W.P.Nos.l8717 of 2022 &? 35328 of 2022
1976(1)see 671
^ AIR 2003 SO 355
9
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220of 2024
and the directions therein, dated 4.07.S022 and 01.11.2022
respectively, as also inspection reports in respect of the college in
question, the learned counsel submits that the l^t respondent having
rejected the permission for establishment of college as there is no
viability, without conducting an enquiry or calling for a fresh report.
issued orders granting permission. He submits that the said orders have
been issued due to political reasons and the conclusions arrived at by
the learned Single Judge in this regard are based on the material on
record. He prays for dismissal of the appeals as also the writ petition.
Consideration by the Court:
15. Perused the orders under challenge and gone through the material
on record.
16. At the outset, it may be pertinent to mention that before the
learned Single Judge, the appellant College had not caused appearance
despite service of notice. In the present appeals, no ground with regard
to 'locus'of the writ petitioners has been raised. Be that as it may.
17. The Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982 (for short 'the Act,
1982') has been enacted to consolidate and amend the laws relating to
the educational system in the State of Andhra Pradesh for reforming.
organizing and developing the said educational system and to provide
for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. As provided
10
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
under Section 1 (3), the said Act applies to all educational institutions and
tutorial institutions in the State except, -
(i) xxxxxxxx
(ii) xxxxxxxx
(hi) xxxxxxxx
(iv) educational institutions imparting intermediate education in
so far as the matters pertaining to them are dealt with in the
Andhra Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1971 (AP Act 2
of 1971).
18. As per Section 2 (11) of the Act, "college" means [a college
including a medical college established or maintained] and administered
by, or affiliated to or associated with or recognized by, any University in
the State and includes a junior college recognized by or affiliated to the
Andhra Pradesh Board of Intermediate Education. In terms of Section
2 (12) of the Act, "competent authority" is any person, officer or
authority authorized by the Government by notification to perform the
functions of the competent authority under the Act for such area or for
such purposes as may be specified in the notification.
19. Chapter VI of the Act, 1982 deals with the Establishment of
Educational Institutions, their Administration and Control. Section 18
of the Act, reads as follows:
18. Government to provide facilities for unparting education - The
Government may, for the purpose of implementing the provisions of this Act,
provide adequate facilities for imparting general education, technical
education, special education and teacher education in the State by -
11
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
&WP 12220 of 2024
(a) establishing and maintaining educational institutions;
(b) permitting any local authority or a private body of persons to
establish educational institutions and maintain them according to such
specifications as may be prescribed; and
(c) taking, from time to time, such other steps as they may consider
necessary or expedient.
20. Section 20 of the Act, 1982 deals with permission for
establishment of educational institutions. In terms of the said Section,
the Competent authority shall, from time to time, conduct a survey as to
identify the educational needs of the locality under its jurisdiction, and
notify in the prescribed manner through the local newspapers calling
for applications from the educational agencies desirous of establishing
educational institutions. Section 20 (2) of the Act contemplates that
pursuant to the notification under sub-section (1), any educational
agency including local authority or registered body of persons may
make an application, within such period, in such manner and to such
authority as may be notified for the grant of permission therefor. As per
Section 20 (3) of the Act, any educational agency applying for
permission under sub-section (2), shall,- (a) before the permission is
granted, satisfy the authority concerned,-
(i) that there is need for providing educational facilities to the people in
the locality;
(ii) that there is adequate financial provision for continued and efficient
maintenance of the institution as prescribed by the competent authority;
(iii) that the institution is proposed to be located in sanitary and
healthy surroundings;
12
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
(b) enclose to the application;-
(i) title deeds relating to the site for building, playground and garden
proposed to be provided;
(ii) plans approved by the local authority concerned which shall
conform to the rules prescribed therefor; and
(hi) documents evidencing availabhity of the finances needed for
constructing the proposed buildings; and
(c) within the period specified by the authority concerned in the order
granting permission:-
(i) appoint teaching staff qualified according to the rules made by the
Government in this behalf;
(u) satisfy the other requirements laid down by this Act and the rules
and orders made thereunder failing which it shall be competent for the said
authority to cancel the permission.
21. The Government in exercise of powers conferred under Sections
20 and 21 r/w Section 99 of the Act, 1982 framed the Rules, 1987 under
Government and private sectors vide G.O.Ms.No.29, Education (Rules),
dated 05.02.1987. In terms of Rule 1 (2), the said Rules shall apply to
all educational institutions (both Government and private) imparting
the following classes/categories of education in the State of Andhra
Pradesh:
(a) Junior Colleges (All institutions imparting Intermediate education
with or without attached high school/degree classes/courses);
(b) xxxxxxx
(c) xxxxxxx
(d) xxxxxxxx
(e) xxxxxxxx
(0 xxxxxxxx
13
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
&WP 12220 of 2024
22. As per Rule 2 (d), the 'Competent Authority' means the authority
which is competent to gremt permission / recognition / affiliation as the
case may be to the educational institutions. Rule 4 of the Rules, 1987
deals with conditions for grant of permission and the Rules 4 (1) and
(2) which are of immediate relevance reads thus:
4. Conditions for grant of permission- (1) Permission for the establishment of
any of the educational institutions mentioned in sub-rule (2) of Rule 1 or for
opening of additional courses in any existing educational institution shall be
granted only if the conditions laid down in Section 20 of the Act are satisfied
and after obtaining the prior approval of the commissioner under sub-section
(2) of Section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Commissionerate of Higher Education
Act, 1986;
(2) No permission shall be granted if the educational needs of the locality are
adequately served already and in the opinion of the competent authority, the
opening of a new institution is likely to create unhealthy and undesirable
competition with another institution of the same class/category, in the area.
23. Further, Rule 5 deals with application for grant of permission and
contemplates that all applications for establishment of a Junior College
shall be made to the Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education and
that the applications accompanied by the documents mentioned in the
said Rule shall reach the competent authority not later than the 31st
January of the year preceding the academic year in which the
institution is proposed to be opened. Rule 6 deals with the conditions for
grant of Permission. As per Rule 8 (2), the Commissionerate of Higher
Education is the competent authority to grant or refuse permission for
the establishment of various categories of Educational institutions
indicated under Rule 1 (2) of the Rules 1987. Rule 8 (2) contemplates
14
HQ&NJSJ
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
that the Government, keeping in view of their financial position during
the particular financial, academic year and educational needs of the
localities on priority basis, shall take a policy decision as to the number
of Government and private institutions proposed to be established
during the particular academic year, identifying the localities where
they are to be established in consultation with the Director and
communicate the same to the Commissionarate. The said Rule also
contemplates calling for applications by Gazette Notification and / or
newspaper advertisement in triphcate, from the educational agencies
desirous of establishing Government / private institution of the category
specified and in the locality specified along with the fees prescribed to
the Boaurd of Intermediate Education / University concerned, as the case
may be, following the procedure prescribed under the Rules 5 and 6.
24. That apart. Rule 8 (3) stipulates that the Board of Intermediate
Education / University concerned shall scrutinize the applications
received in triplicate, from the educational agencies as well as those
emanated from the Government and got forwarded through the
Director, strictly in accordance with the Rules and Regulations provided
under the Act. The said Rule also contemplates conduct of necessary
inspection, submission of the inspection report and recommendations to
the Director, who in turn submits his remarks to the Commisionerate.
Rule 8 (4) envisages that the Commissionerate may, after verification of
15
HG & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
&WP 12220 of 2024
the application and the inspection report, either grant or refuse the
permission.
25. A close reading of the provisions of the Act and Rules referred to
above, would make it clear that the establishment of an educational
institution - a junior college like in the present case, shall be governed
by the procedure contemplated by law. As seen from the record and it is
not in dispute that the 3rd respondent-College made a representation to
the Hon'ble Member of Parliament seeking permission for establishment
of an educational institution / college and the same was forwarded to the
Hon'ble Minister for Education. Entertaining of the said representation
/ application by the Government and granting of permission for
establishment of college, according to the Mr.Pitchaiah, the learned
counsel for the 3"^ respondent College / appellant, is traceable to the
power conferred on the Government under Section 18 of the Act. It is
also his contention that in the light of the said statutory power of the
Government, reliance on Rule 4 of the Rules, 1987 by the learned Single
Judge is erroneous.
26. Section 18 of the Act contemplates that the Government may
provide adequate facilities for imparting education and permission to
establish educational institutions, in general terms. Whereas Section 20
of the Act envisages permission of the competent authority for
establishment of educational institutions and stipulates a specific
16
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
procedure as contained therein. That apart, as noted earher, in
furtherance of the provisions of the Act, 1982, the Government framed
the Rules, 1987, inter alia prescribing the conditions for grant of
permission and making of application in connection thereto. However,
referring to a Full Bench decision of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra
Pradesh at Hyderabad in Society of St.Ann's, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad
V. The Secretary to Government Education Department, Hyderabad^, a
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Orders in W.P.No.33168 of 2018
referred to supra, opined that even in the absence of any notification
issued by competent authority under sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the
A.P.Education Act, 1982 calling for applications from the Educational
agencies desirous of establishing educational institutions, it is open to
any educational agency including religious or linguistic minority, to
make an application to the State Government seeking permission to
establish an educational institution and that it is for the State to decide
whether there is need for establishment of an institution and issue of
notification is not mandatory.
27. The Hon'ble Full Bench in St.Ann's case dealt with the issues
pertaining to the new pohcy of the Government of not granting
permissions for opening new B.Ed; colleges in the State during the
' 1993 see Online AP 121
17
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
academic year 1990-91. Before answering the questions under
reference, the Full Bench, inter aJiah.e\& thus;
"48. When an application is made by any educational agency to the State
Government for the grant of permission for establishing an educational
institution, the State Govermnent may follow the principles underlying
sub-section (3) of Section 20 of the Act in considering the application for
the grant of permission though the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section
20 strictly speaking, do not apply for such consideration and they apply
only where an application is made to the concerned authority pursuant to a
notification issued by a competent authority calling for applications from
the educational agencies desirous of establishing educational institutions.
While the State Government considers the applications, it can take into
account not only the need for providing educational facilities to the people
in the locality, it can as well take into account the educational needs of the
entire State, if the State Government considers it necessary, for the
purpose of implementing the provisions of the Act. It is for the State
Government to decide whether the educational needs of a locality or area
or of the entire State shall be taken into account in considering the
applications and such a decision has to be arrived at on the basis of all the
relevant factors, (emphasis supplied)
49. If the State Government takes a policy decision in the exercise of the
statutory power vested in it under Section 18 as regards the establishment
of educational institutions in the State on the basis of relevant
considerations referred to above, and such a policy decision is not opposed
to either fundamental rights or principles of natural justice and it is not
found to be otherwise imreasonable or arbitrary, such a policy decision
shall not generally be interfered with by the Courts. It will not be possible
to lay down precise principles for testing the validity of a policy decision
taken by the State Government. It depends upon the facts and
circiimstances of the case subject to the general principles referred to by us
supra.
50. The need for providing educational facilities to the people in the
locality, contemplated under Section 20 (3) (a) (i) has to be understood in
the context of the educational needs of the locality identified by the
competent authority under sub-section (1) of Section 20. Even in a case
where the educational needs of a locality have been identified by a
competent authority, the need for providing educational facilities to the
people in the locality shall be subject to the policy decision, if any, taken by
the State Government in that regard in exercise of its power under Section
18 of the Act. If a competent authority has either not been appointed or
after appointment it hais not issued any notification calling for applications
for estabhshing educational institutions as contemplated under sub-section
(1) of Section 20, even then, it is open to any educational agency to apply
to the State Government for the grant of permission for establishing an
educational institution in such a case, it is for the State Government to
pass appropriate orders on the application submitted to it, on the bcisis of
18
HCJ & NJS, J
WA5_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
the principles underlying sub-section (3) of Section 20 and the policy
decision, if any, taken by it as regards the need. But, the State Government
has to take appropriate decision having regard to the relevant criteria,
whether the educational needs of the locality or of the area or of the entire
stat^shaJl be taken into account." (emphasis supplied)
28. A close reading of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Full Bench would
go to show that even in the absence of a Notification by the competent
authority under Section 20 (1) of the Act, 1982, an application for
establishment of an educational institution can be made to the State
Government and a policy decision may be taken, however such a
decision shall be, in compliance with the principles underl3nng Section
20 (3) of the Act and arrived at on the basis of all the relevant factors
and having regard to the relevant criteria i.e., educational needs of the
locality. The power conferred on the Government under Section 18 of
the Act, 1982 can be exercised only in respect of a policy decision,
which shall be in tandem with the Rules and based on consideration of
relevant factors. Lest, the permissions granted under the guise of policy
decision would frustrate the objection of the Act and render Section 20
of the Act, 1982 otiose ajx6. Rules 4 and 5 of the Rules, 1987 redundant.
Therefore, though the permission to the respondent-College appears
to be in exercise of powers of the Government under Section 18 of the
Act, the same shall be in accordance with Law.
29.
Further, the policy decision of the Government, as noted above,
shall be on consideration of the relevant factors, criteria and due
19
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
satisfaction that there is need for providing educational facilities to the
people in the locality. In the present case, it is not in dispute that there
are about 8 colleges in the Cheepurupalli Mandal and in such
circumstances whether establishment of another college is really
required to cater the needs of the locahty or granting of permission is
likely to create unhealthy and undesirable competition amongst the
institutions already established in the locality are the relevant factors,
which are to be considered before a decision is taken by the
Government. However, no such exercise appears to have been
undertaken and no material is placed on record in this regard
suggestive of the same. Non-consideration of the relevant factors
vitiates the permission. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State
of U.P., &? Renusagar Power Co. and Others^, the exercise of power
whether legislative or administrative will be set aside if there is
manifest error in the exercise of such power or the exercise of the
power is manifestly arbitrary. Similaj?ly, if the power has been exercised
on a non-consideration or non-appUcation of mind to relevant factors
the exercise of power will be regarded as manifestly erroneous.
30. Assuming that Section 18 of the Act confers unbridled power to
the Government to grant permission for estabhshing an educational
institution / college to cater the educational needs of students of any
''(1988) 4 see 59
20
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
particular locality / Mandal, the order granting permission shall be
based on material on record. In the present case, it is pertinent to
mention here that two inspections in respect of the respondent-
CoUege were conducted and thereafter the Government vide Memo
dated 16.11.2022 rejected its request for establishment of new private
unaided junior college at Cheepurupalli inter alia on the premise that
there is no viability for establishment of the same. While it is curious to
note that the said rejection proceedings were not challenged, yet within
a short time of about 1 I/2 months, the Government changed its decision
and granted permission for establishment of the S^ci respondent-CoUege
through the proceedings impugned in the writ petition. There is no
reference to the subsequent inspections or reports forming the basis for
granting the permission, much less on a request, if any, made by the
respondent college to reconsider the earlier rejection orders. In the
absence of any material justifying the orders granting permission, the
same cannot be sustained.
31.
On a close scrutiny of the material on record and appreciation of
the chronological events, it would appear as though imder the
camouflage of a new college - 'Aditya Junior College' established by
another society, "Sri Aditya Junior College" which was unauthorizedly
shifted from Ganividi to Cheepurpalli, got permission / approval for
relocation of the College, indirectly. Pacts and Circumstances of the case
21
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
lends support to the conclusions arrived at by the learned Single Judge
that the permission was granted due to political considerations and the
same cannot be viewed as baseless, erroneous or perverse.
32. Coming to the other contention with regard to the 'locus standi'of
the writ petitioners, Rule 4 (2) of the Rules, 1987 inter alia
contemplates that 'no permission shall be granted, if the opening of a
new institution is likely to create unhealthy and undesirable
competition with another institution of the same class or category, in
the area.' In the light of the statutory provisions referred to supra.
granting of permission without verification of the relevant aspects or
report, amounts to violation of the Rules and effects the rights of the
writ petitioners to impart education in a healthy and competitive
manner. The establishment of the Educational Institution in question
without adherence to the statutory provisions certainly effects the writ
petitioners' interest and therefore they have 'locus' to question the
Government Order dated 02.01.2023. As such, the writ petition
instituted by them is maintainable. Be that as it may.
33. The judgment in Jasbhai Motibhai's case (referred 1 supra) relied
on by the learned counsel for the respondent-College is distinguishable
on facts. The Hon'ble Supreme Court was dealing with the Bombay
Cinema Rules, 1954 and a stand was taken by the appellant before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court that the setting up of a rival cinema house in the
22
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
& WP_12220 of 2024
town will adversely affect his monopolistic commercial interest, causing
pecuniary harm and loss of business due to competition. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court opined that such harm or loss is not wrongful in the eye
of law, because it does not result in injury to a legal right or a legally
protected interest, the business competition causing it being a lawful
activity.
34.
Insofar as the T.M.A.Pai Foundation case (referred 2 supra) is
concerned, there is no dispute with regard to the proposition that right
to estabhsh and administer educational institutions is guaranteed under
the Constitution to aU citizens under Articles 19 (l)(g) and 26, and to
minorities specifically under Article 30 of the Constitution of India.
However, the establishment of such educational institutions shall be
governed by the relevant enactments - in the present case, the
A.P.Education Act and the Rules, 1987 framed thereunder, apphcable to
the 3'''i respondent-Educational Institution in question.
35.
Considering the matter in its entirety, in the light of the
conclusions arrived at supra, this Court is not persuaded to take a
different view to that of the learned Single Judge, which otherwise also
does not suffer from any perversity or illegality. Further, the order in
the Review Petition is based on sound judicial principles and contain
valid reasons, warrants no interference by this Court. Therefore, the
contentions advanced on behalf of the 3'"'^ respondent are rejected.
23
HCJ & NJS, J
WAs_536, 537 of 2024
&WP 12220 of 2024
36. As the proceedings challenged in W.P.No.lS220 of 2024 are
consequent to the orders passed by the learned Single Judge, upheld by
this Court, no interference is warranted.
37. In the result^ writ appeals and the writ petition are dismissed.
However, this order would not preclude the 3'^'i respondent-Coll ege from
making an appropriate application sesking permission for
establishment of a Junior College at Cheepurupalli, which if made, shall
be dealt with, strictly in accordance with the Law.
There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending
applications shall stand closed,
1 Sd/- M.RAMESH BABU
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SEC ftOKf^FICER
To
I
1. OneCCto SRI M PITCHMAN, Advocate [OPUC]
2. One CC to SRI SRIVIJAY MATHUKUMILLI, Advocate [OPUC]
\ 3. One CC to SRI N RAJA RAJESWAR REDDY, SC for BIE [OPUC]
4. Two CCS to GP for SCHOOL EDUCATION, High Court of Andhra
Pradesh. [OUT]
5. Three CD Copies
Madhu
8
HIGH COURT
DATED:23/08/2024
COMMON ORDER
WA.No.536 AND 537 of 2024 AND W.P. NO. 12220 OF
X t 2 SEP 20211 m"
Co,
<5.
^ Current Section
^Cspatcv^^
DISMISSING BOTH WA's AND WP
WITHOUT COSTS
