APHC010177492025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 9216 of 2025 Between: 1. ARCHANA VIGNAN EDUCATIONAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY, D.NO.51/87, KOTHAPETA, RAYACHOTY, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY P.MADAN MOHAN REDDY. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE COUNCIL OF HIGHER EDUCATION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, 2. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE COUNCIL OF HIGHER EDUCATION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, 21, ROUSE AVENUE INSTITUTIONAL AREA, NEAR BAL BHAVAN, NEW DELHI- 110002. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KOCHIRI RAJA SHEKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION 2. K RADHIKA The Court made the following: 2 ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri T. Venkata Sai Manoj, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Kochiri Raja Shekar, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Smt. P. Lakshmi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education for Respondent No.1 and Sri V. Raghu, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Smt. K. Radhika, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.2. 2. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the Representation submitted by the Secretary of the Writ Petitioner/Society dated 18.09.2024 (Ex.P.1). 3. On perusal of the said Representation, it is noticed by the Court that none of the sentences in the said Representation make any sense. The Representation is bereft of any grammar nor has clarity as to what the Secretary is seeking from the Andhra Pradesh State Council of Higher Education. 4. This Court is also of the opinion that the person who read this Representation could not have even understood what the applicant (Secretary of the Management) is seeking. The said letter is usefully extracted hereunder: “We inform to your kind notice Archana Vignan Educational Rural Development Society, under Establish new Law college (LLB) (3 years & 5 Years), college name Archana College of Law, E-Abbavaram, Rayachoty, Annamayya Dt. we are submission of No Objection Certificate from Y.V.University, Kadapa, provide Inspection committee and issue the permission and Recommended Bar council of India, for the Academic year 2024-25. 3 In this connection we are requesting to you kindly you can provide inspection committee members and issue the college permission for the Academic year 2024-25 as early as possible.” 5. The least that the Secretary could have done before addressing a Representation is to get it written by a person who is a literate. 6. Having regard to these facts, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition at the stage of admission without going into merit, directing the Secretary of the Writ Petitioner to make a fresh Representation to the Competent Authority. Needless to state that the Respondent No.2, upon receipt of such fresh Representation shall forthwith act in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the fresh Representation. 7. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 8. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Date: 09.04.2025 BSK 4 57 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 9216 of 2025 Date: 09.04.2025 BSK