ORDER : ROBIN PHUKAN, J. Heard Mr. P. Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5. 2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, namely, B.K. Wahed Ali H.S. School, has prayed for issuing direction to the respondent No. 2 to provincialise the petitioner school and the services of the teaching and non-teaching staffs of the petitioner school in light of the proposal and reports submitted and also to direct the respondent authorities to open the Darpan Portal for submission of applications for admission into H.S. 1st Year class for the academic session 2025-26, and to register the name of the petitioner school under Darpan Portal w.e.f. 2025 on the basis of fulfilment of the relevant criteria provided under the Revised Regulations of 2004 of the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council, and further to set aside and quash the Notification dated 12.04.2025. 3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, are briefly stated as under: “The petitioner school was established during 1995-2005 and it had approached the concerned authorities for permission to open higher classes. Thereafter, the Assam State School Education Board/respondent No. 4 submitted its feasibility report before the respondent authorities in respect of 30 numbers of higher secondary schools, including the petitioner school after making necessary inspection during the month of November and December. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner school that prior to 2024-25, students were allowed to admit in the petitioner school into Higher Secondary 1st Year classes, but the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council, vide Notification dated 01.04.2024, has not allowed the petitioner school to conduct admission into Higher Secondary 1st Year class for the ensuing academic sessions 2024-25, on the ground that the petitioner school falls under the category of non-permitted private institution, and the petitioner school was also made disabled on the Darpan Portal to restrict all such institutions from admission. However, similarly placed schools have approached this Court by filing writ petitions and this Court was pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant registration/admission of students through Darpan Portal. However, similarly placed schools have approached this Court by filing writ petitions and this Court was pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant registration/admission of students through Darpan Portal. Thereafter, again the authorities had issued one Notification dated 12.04.2025, whereby admission of students in Class-XI is allowed by registration under the Darpan Portal. Earlier, the petitioner school had applied for granting permission and feasibility report, was also given by the respondent No. 4 after scrutiny, however, this time the petitioner school is not allowed to avail the benefit of Darpan Portal to conduct admission into H.S. 1st Year for the academic session 2025-26, as a result of which the students are deprived of getting admission. Being aggrieved, the petitioner school has approached this Court by filing the present petition.” 4. Mr. Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner school was established during 1995-2005 and thereafter, the respondent No. 4, after inspection being carried out during the month of November and December submitted its feasibility report before the respondent authorities in respect of 30 numbers of higher secondary schools, including the petitioner school. Mr. Bharadwaj also submits that prior to 2024-2025, students were allowed to admit in H.S. 1st Year classes, but vide Notification dated 01.04.2024, the petitioner school was not allowed to conduct admission in H.S. 1st Year for the ensuing academic session 2024-25, and the ground being shown is that the petitioner school falls under the category of non-permitted private institution and consequently, the Darpan Portal is also disabled from accessing by the petitioner school. Mr. Bharadwaj further submits that though vide Notification dated 12.04.2025, admission of students in Class-XI was allowed by registration under the Darpan Portal, but the petitioner school was denied the benefit of Darpan Portal for admission into H.S. 1st Year for the academic session 2025-26, thereby causing inconvenience to the students. 4.1. Referring to a decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 07.04.2025, in WP(C) No. 3224/2024 ( Arjun Das and 26 Ors. vs. the State of Assam and  Ors. ), Mr. Bharadwaj submits that the case of the present petitioner is also covered by the said decision and that by passing a similar direction, this present writ petition may be disposed of. 5. Mr. Chutia, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. vs. the State of Assam and  Ors. ), Mr. Bharadwaj submits that the case of the present petitioner is also covered by the said decision and that by passing a similar direction, this present writ petition may be disposed of. 5. Mr. Chutia, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 fairly submits that the present case is covered by the decision of this Court in Arjun Das (supra) and that by granting similar relief to the petitioner herein, the present petition may be closed. 6. Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Arjun Das (supra). 7. It appears that the present case is covered by the decision of this Court in Arjun Das (supra), wherein in paragraph Nos. 31 to 36, it has been observed as under: “ 31. On perusal of the records, it is found that the petitioners have applied for permission with requisite records to the appropriate authority. As noted above, since the Council vide notification dated 01.04.2024, had notified that the case of the non-permitted private institutions, which have applied for the permission with relevant records, will be verified and may be allowed to conduct admission, if the relevant records are found in order, I am of the considered view that there is no reason as to why the institutions of the petitioners, for that matter the case of the petitioners shall not be verified and allowed to conduct the admission and pass consequential order as the institutions/schools of the petitioners appear to be feasible for permission to be accorded to conduct admission for the Higher Secondary 1st Year class and onwards. 32. The respondent AHSEC has made a categorical stand that if the permission is granted by the Government, the AHSEC would not have any objection, as the according/granting of permission is with the authority of the Government and not with the AHSEC. If that be so, since the petitioners have applied for permission to the respondent authorities, I am of the considered view that the respondent authorities are deserved to be directed to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with the regulations, relating the issue of granting permission to the schools of the petitioners and pass consequential order. 33. If that be so, since the petitioners have applied for permission to the respondent authorities, I am of the considered view that the respondent authorities are deserved to be directed to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with the regulations, relating the issue of granting permission to the schools of the petitioners and pass consequential order. 33. Although the petitioner have also prayed for a direction to complete the process of provincialisation of services of the petitioners under the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-organization of Educational Institutions) Act 2017, as amended in 2018, this Court refrains from determining the said prayer, as the same would be consequential to the decision or order that would be taken or passed by the respondent authorities as would be directed (infra). Therefore, present determination is confined to the issue of granting permission, as the petitioners have not particularly pressed the above grievance at the time of hearing. However, it is observed that the above grievance would be consequential to the granting of permission by the respondent authorities and the petitioners are at liberty to renew the same, if need arises, at the appropriate stage. 34. In view of the foregoing discussions, I am of the considered view that the respondents are deserved to be directed to consider the case of the petitioners for according permission and allow to conduct admission for the Higher Secondary 1st Year class and onwards, in their respective schools. 35. Accordingly, the respondent authorities, namely, the Secretary to the govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department and the Director of Secondary Education, Assam as well as the AHSEC are directed to consider the case of the petitioners, within a period of three (3) weeks, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 36. Consequently, the impugned letter dated 14.09.2022, issued by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department; the impugned communication dated 03.06.2024, issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam and the impugned order dated 08.01.2024, issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam are hereby set aside and quashed.” 8. 36. Consequently, the impugned letter dated 14.09.2022, issued by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Secondary Education Department; the impugned communication dated 03.06.2024, issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam and the impugned order dated 08.01.2024, issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam are hereby set aside and quashed.” 8. Thus, taking note of the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, and also considering the facts and circumstances on the record, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by granting similar relief as granted to the petitioners in the case of Arjun Das (supra). 9. It is provided that the respondent authorities shall accord permission to the petitioner school to conduct admission for the H.S. 1st Year classes for the academic session 2025-26. Further, it is provided that the respondent authorities shall reopen the Darpan Portal for submission of applications for H.S. 1st Year classes, subject, however to fulfilment of relevant criteria provided under the Revised Regulations of 2004 of the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council. Consequently, the Notification dated 12.04.2025, stands set aside and quashed. 10. In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of.