City Highschool for Girls, Opp: Water Tank, Yapral, RR Dist v. Hyderabad
Case at a glance
- Order date
- 23 Sep 2004
- Bench
- V V S RAO
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- A.P. Education Act, 1982 s. 22(2)
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with the running of city High school for Girls at Yapral, Ranga Reddy District in the light of Sec. 22(2) of the A.P. Education Act, 1982 and the rules made thereunder and consequently direct the respondents to communicate orders if any passed on the application / proposal submitted by the petitioner for grant of recognition in accordance with the directions of the first respondent Education (PS)Department dated 15-07-2003. No.10395/ps-2/2003-04 in Memo Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.SRINIVAS RAO, ADVOCATE FOR MR.Y.VENKAT SASTRY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Though the Interlocutory applications are listed to day, Sri P. Srinivasa Rao, Advocate representing Sri Y. Venkat Sastri, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of the writ petition has become infructuous. The writ petition is therefore dismissed as infructuous. September 23, 2004. V.V.S. RAO, J _______________ YS To ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER 1 The Principal Secretary, Education (PS) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner & Director of School Education, Government Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 3 The Regional Joint Director of School Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 4 The District Educational Officer, RR District at Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 5 The Deputy Educational Officer, Malkajgiri, RR District, Secunderabad. 6 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Education, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (O.U.T) 7 Two CD copies.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; A.P. Education Act, 1982 — s. 22(2).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 23 Sep 2004. The bench was V V S RAO.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.