Telangana High Court
WP/28217/2009 of M/s. Sri Ram Tutorial, Vs The District Educational Officer, on 29 December 2009
COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THIS THE 29th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009 W.P.Nos.28189, 28190, 28214, 28215, 28216, 28217, 28218, 28282 and 28339 of 2009 W.P.No.28189 of 2009 Between: Smt M/s. M.S.M. Tutorial Child’s Education ... PETITIONER(S) and The District
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESHAT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THIS THE 29[th] DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009
W.P.Nos.28189, 28190, 28214, 28215, 28216, 28217, 28218, 28282and 28339 of 2009
W.P.No.28189 of 2009
Between:
Smt M/s. M.S.M. Tutorial Child’s Education
and
... PETITIONER(S)
The District Educational officer, Visakhapatnam District,Visakhapatnam and another …RESPONDENT(S)
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
W.P.Nos.28189, 28190, 28214, 28215, 28216, 28217, 28218, 28282and 28339 of 2009COMMON ORDER:
The petitioners in all these petitions claim to be the tutorialinstitutions functioning in and around Visakhapatnam city. It is statedthat they impart only informal tutorial education and not regular courseof study. The State of Andhra Pradesh framed A.P. Tutorial Institutions(Registration and Regulation) Rules 1997 in exercise of powers underSection 32 read with Section 99 of the A.P. Education Act, 1982providing rules for registration and regulation of tutorial institutions. The petitioners contend that though the rules were framed, the activityof registration is not being undertaken by the Government and that theyare prepared to obtain registration as and when the respondents take steps in this regard. Their grievance is that the respondents arepreventing them from functioning, on the strength of the order passedby this Court in W.P.No.11007 of 2009 and batch dated 07.09.2009.
Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and the learnedGovernment Pleader for School Education.
The establishment of tutorial institutions is not prohibited underlaw. On the other hand, the Government framed rules for registrationand regulation of such institutions. The order passed by this Court inW.P.No.11007 of 2009 and batch is in respect of unrecognisedschools. Firstly, the petitioners do not answer the description ofschools. Secondly, even assuming that the petitioners are indulging inany activity contrary to law, they can be proceeded against, only afterissuance of show cause notice. No such steps were taken.
Hence, the writ petitions are allowed and the respondents aredirected not to interfere with the activity of imparting informal tutorialeducation by the petitioners. It shall however, be open to them to issuenotice and take further action in accordance with law. There shall beno order as to costs.
_________________________
L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J
29[th ]December 2009CVRK
Note: Office to issuecopy within one week. B/o CVRK