Telangana High Court
WP/27104/2006 of Telugu Bhashodyama Samakhya (Regd. No. 1288/2003) Vs State of Andhra Praesh, rep by its Secretary to on 29 December 2006
SHRI G.S.SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 27104 OF 2006 Between: Telugu Bhashodyama Samakhya, Hyderabad & another ..... Petitioners AND State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. By its Secretary to Govt. School Education Department, Hyderabad &
HON'BLE SHRI G.S.SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICEAND
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.27104 OF2006
Between:
Telugu Bhashodyama Samakhya,Hyderabad & another
AND
..... Petitioners
State of Andhra PradeshRep. By its Secretary to Govt. School EducationDepartment, Hyderabad & another
.....Respondents
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.
:: O R D E R ::
Counsel for the petitioners : Shri A. Ramalingeswara Rao Counsel for the respondents : Government Pleader for School Education Dated: 29.12.2006
Per G.S.SINGHVI, CJ
In this petition, the petitioners have prayed for issue of awrit of mandamus to the respondents to issue instructions to allthe educational institutions including the schools run by theGovernment to impart education to the students up to class V inTelugu medium subject to the protection granted to the minoritiesunder Article 350-A of the Constitution of India.
Petitioner No.1 – Telugu Bhashodyama Samakhya is aregistered society. It was launched on 21.02.2003 for protection ofTelugu language spoken by nearly 15 crores of people in andaround the State of Andhra Pradesh. It is said to be successor ofMathru Basha Samithi which had been working for the promotionof the cause of Telugu language for over nine years. PetitionerNo.2 is an Editor of a monthly Telugu magazine titled ‘NadustunnaCharitra’. In paragraph 3 of his affidavit, Shri C. Dharma Rao,Chairman of petitioner No.1 has given the details of variousschools operating in the State of Andhra Pradesh, the medium ofeducation in primary schools and pleaded that even though Teluguis being spoken by vast majority of people in the State of AndhraPradesh, the State Government has not made Telugu languagecompulsory in the educational institutions.
The petitioners’ grievance is that on account of theGovernment’s failure to make the mother tongue of the majority ofthe people as language of instruction in the schools, a number ofschools are opting for English medium and if this tendency is notcurbed, there will be great adverse impact on the future generationof the State.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Though the cause sought to be espoused by the petitioners is verylaudable, this Court, in exercise of its power under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India, cannot issue mandatory direction to theState Government to introduce a particular language in theGovernment primary and other schools. Learned counsel for thepetitioners could not draw our attention to any constitutional orstatutory provisions under which the State Government is obligedto introduce Telugu as the medium of instruction in primary andother schools or restrain the management of the schools fromintroducing English or other languages.
For the reason aforestated, the writ petition is dismissed.
As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition,W.P.M.PNo.34842 of 2006 filed by the petitioners for expeditinghearing of the appeal is disposed of as infructuous.
G.S.SINGHVI, CJ
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
29.12.2006ksld