Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29225 (AP)

Hindu Aided Elementary School v. Sri Rajeshwar Tiwari, I.A.S.,

CC/2186/2013 · 2025-03-24

Subba Reddy Satti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010418692013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2186/2013 Between: Hindu Aided Elementary School and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Sri Rajeshwar Tiwari I A S ...CONTEMNOR Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P V S S S RAMA RAO Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. K V RAGHU VEER The Court made the following: ORDER The above contempt case is filed complaining non-implementation of the order dated 30.07.2013 in W.P.No.22580 of 2010. 2. The petitioners, along with others, filed the above said writ petition impugning the Memo No.12080/COSE/A2/2004-4, dated 20.10.2004 issued by the respondent, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. The said writ petition was disposed of by way of a common order on 13.07.2013 declaring the Memo No.12080/COSE/A2/2004-4, dated 20.10.2004 issued by the Principal Secretary to Government, School Education, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21-A and 45of the Constitution of India and directed the respondents to accord permission to the petitioners institutions to fill up the vacant grant-in-aid posts in accordance with the Rules. 4. Complaining non-implementation of said order, this contempt case is filed. 5. Sri Gurram Ramachandra Rao, learned counsel for the respondent submitted the written instructions of the District Educational Officer, Prakasam District, Ongole vide Lr.Rc.No.Spl/C2/2025, dated 19.03.2025. A perusal of the written instructions would indicate that in respect of petitioner-schools, three posts are sanctioned and now working and hence, no need to fill up aided posts as per U-Dise. 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any violation of the order dated 30.07.2013 in W.P.No.22580 of 2010. 7. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is Closed. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI PVD