. / IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 25595 OF 2024 Between: Muthabathula Ratna Kumar, S/o Muthabathula Verriyya, aged about 47 years, R/o 23-1-75/1, Nageswararao Street, CBM Compound, Rama Rao Peta, Jilla Parishath Centre, Kakinada, E.G.District, Andhra Pradesh - 533004 /■ ...PETITIONER • AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by Principal Secretary, Education Department, A.P. Secretariat, Amarvathi. 2. The District Collector, Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh 3. The District Educational Officer, Vizianagaram. 4. The Deputy Educational Officer, Bobbili, Vizianagaram. 5. The Education Committee of Convention of the Baptist Churches of the Northern Circars, (Regd No. 16/1948-1949) HO. Vuyyuru, Krishna District Andhra Pradesh. Represented by its Convener, Rev.Dr.Dasari Yacob, S/o Moses, aged 57 years, R/o Vuyyuru, Krishna District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 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 to forbear the proceeding Rc.No.4156/B2/2023 Dt- 16.10.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent by holding it as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the procedure laid down under Section 24 of the AP Education Act and consequently quash the proceedings dated 16.10.2024 passed by the second respondent and direct the second respondent to give effect to the proceeding vide Rc.NO.4155/B2/2023 dated 24.03.2024. lA NO: 1 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 grant interim suspension of the operation of the proceedings Rc.No.4156/B2/2023 Dt; 16-10-2024 issued by the second pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRI. RAMESH KATIKINENI respondent Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1,3 & 4: GP FOR SERVICES III Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent No.5: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010495732024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] WEDNESDAY JHE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 25595/2024 Between: ...PETITIONER Muthabathula Ratna Kumar AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.RAMESH KATIKINENI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES III 2.GP FOR SERVICES I 3.S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY The Court made the following Common Order: 1 The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “ to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to forbear the proceeding Rc.No.4156/B2/2023, Dt.16.10.2024 passed by the 2!'^ respondent by holding it as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the procedure laid i iipi^ 2 down under Section 24 of the AP Education Act and consequently quash the proceedings dated 16.10.2024 by the second respondent and direct the passed ^ ^ second respondent to give effect to the proceeding vide Rc.NO.4155/B2/2023 dated 24.03.2024 2. Brief facts of, the case CBM Girls High School, Bobbili from are that the petitioner was the Correspondent of 24,03.2024 to 16.10.2024. His appointment was made by the Convener, Education Committee of Convention of the Baptist Churches of the Northern Circars and the same (in short CBCNC), Kakinada given effect to by the Collector, Vizianagaram vide was proceedings Rc.No.4155/B2/2023, dated 24.03.2024. The said school i dilapidated condition. The primary school is closed due to part of building IS at was collapsed and main building itself is precariously placed and may collapse at any moment. While so, when the petitioner took over the Correspondent ship. one M/s.TBR Metals and Constructions came forward with a proposal. The said firm had an extent of Ac 3-29 cents along with a building with a built area of 20,000 Sq.feet (four storied building) situated in Survey No. 11-2, Komatipalli, Bobbili Urban, which is suitable for running the school and it offered to exchange the same with the land where the up school is presently run and the said proposal was considered and the Trust Association of CBCNC. Apart from the above approved by the governing body of an extent of 1558.90 was sold on receipt of sale was completed on 05.12.2023 and 06.12.2023 keeping In mind the best Interest of the institution and its Square yards of land belonging to the school consideration. The entire transaction students \ 3 & and their safety. The Trust Association of CBCNC made an application on 16.12.2022 to the second respondent-District Collector, Vizaianagaram requesting to delete the subject matter school from the prohibitory list. The 2 respondent after following the nd procedure, vide proceedings D.Dis.No.3595/2022/E2, dated 09.05.2023 deleted the subject matter school from the prohibitory list. Pursuant to such deletion, the registration of the exchange deed as well as the sale deed was effected and the property of M/s.TBR Metals and Constructions situated at Komatipalli was exchanged with that of the school land. The petitioner and 5**^ respondent made representations dated 06.06.2024, 19.06.2024, and 22.06.2024 to the 4'*' respondent seeking permission to shift the school from the present premises to the land and building that was obtained from M/s.TBR Metals and Constructions. The respondent vide Proceedings Rc.No.4156/B2/202 3, dated 21.08.2024 returned the proposals for want of certain documents. On 23.08.2024, the 5*^ respondent submitted the requisite documents and the same is pending consideration. While so, the 3'^^ respondent issued show cause notice dated 28.09.2024 to the petitioner stating to^ show cause as to why the suitable action should not be taken for cancellation of the order in which notified the Correspondent ship as the petitioner not followed the provisions of A.P. Education Act, 1982. The petitioner submitted detailed reply on 11.10.2024. Without considering the same, the 2^^^^ respondent passed the I 4 impugned order vide Rc.No.4156/B2/2023, dated 16.10.2024 suspending the petitioner from the Correspondent ship of the said school. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed. The resppndent filed counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ petition and mainly contended that the recognition was granted to the CBM Girls High School, Bobbili vide Proc.Rc.No.450/a2/2019, dated 03.07.2019 for the period from 2019-2020 to 2023-2024. As per rule 9 of G.O.Ms.No.1, educational agency should submit the proposals to the competent authority before the 31®* July, 2024, since their recognition expired from the academic year 2023-2024, whereas the petitioner, who is the Correspondent of the school failed to do so. It is further contended that the petitioner has submitted improper explanatipn to the show cause notice on 11.10.2004, hence the 2"** respondent cancelled the orders vide Proc.Rc.No.4155/B2/2023, dated 24.03.2024, in which notified the appointment of the Correspondent to CBM Girls High School, Bobbili vide Progs.Rc.No.4156/B2/2023, dated 16.10.2024 in question under the provisions contained in Section 24(3)(b) of A.P. Education Act, 1982. The 4**“ respondent was appointed as a Special Officer to the CBM Girls High School, Bobbili in place of Correspondent to look after the school administration and other functioning issues of the school till the reconstruction of the management or until further orders vide 3. Education (P.S.2) Department, dated 01.01.1994 the 5 Progs.Rc.No.4156/B2/2023, dated 18.10.2024. Therefore, prays to dismiss the writ petition. Heard Mr.Ramesh Katikineni, learned counsel for the petitioner and 4. learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-lll, for the respondents. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents urged in the writ petition, submits that, the petitioner submitted 5. nd explanation explaining the reasons for the exchange of land, but the 2 respondent passed the impugned order without conducting enquiry and considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner. He further submits that the impugned order passed without recording any reasons and it does not even refer the explanation submitted by the petitioner, which is nothing but violation of principles of natural justice. He further submits that, as per Section 24(3)(b) of the A.P. Education Act, the competent authority has to satisfy that the manager alone is responsible for the lapses or irregularities of the institution, whereas such satisfaction is not reflecting from the impugned order. As there is no compliance of Section 24(3)(b) of the Act, the impugned order is vitiated. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner requests this court to pass appropriate orders. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader vehemently opposed 6. to grant any relief in the present writ petition and prays to dismiss the same. 6 On considering the submissions of both the learned counsels and upon 7. nd perusing the entire material on record, it appears that, whether the 2 respondent considered the explanation submitted by the petitioner or not is not stated anywhere in the impugned proceedings. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that, the petitioner has not been given ample opportunity, while passing the impugned order. Therefore, without touching the merits of the cases, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by remanding back the matter to the 2"^^ respondent for fresh consideration. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The impugned proceedings vide Rc.No.4156/B2/2023, dated 16.10.2024 issued by the 2"^^ respondent is hereby set aside. Further, the matter is remanded back to the 2"^^ respondent with a direction to conduct fresh enquiry and pass appropriate reasoned orders, by considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner dated 8. 11.10.2024, after affording ample opportunity to the petitioner and further if any third party objections received, consider the same also, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. Mr.S.Lakshminarayana Reddy, learned counsel has filed implead petition. But this Court is not inclined to consider the said petition and the implead petitioner is directed to raise his objections before the 2'^^ respondent. 10. There shall be no order as to costs. r V >. 1 11. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- N.NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// I'^SEC^ \ N OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, A.P. Secretariat Amarvathi. 2. The District Collector, Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh 3. The District Educational Officer, Vizianagaram. 4. The Deputy Educational Officer, Bobbili, Vizianagaram. 5 One CC to Sri. Ramesh Katikineni Advocate [OPUC] e' Two CCS to GP For Services ill .High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT], 7. Two CCS to GP For Services I 8. One CC to Sri S 9. Three CD Copies Lakshminarayana Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]. AL \ HIGH COURT DATED:08/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.25595 of 2024 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS