Shortly after the aforesaid purchase, the companyrespondent of the School, on whom the management of the school vests under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982 hereinafter referred to as the Act , shifted the School from the said building to a building nearby and delivered vacant possession of the premises to the appellants.
The appeal is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 11 7 1996, dismissing the appeal filed by the present Appellant and companyfirming the order or directions issued by the learned Single Judge in Writ petition No.
The learned Single Judge by judgment dated 12.6.1996, allowed the writ petition and directed the State Government to take possession of the property under Section 60 of the Act with the further observation that the present appellants may establish their rights by filing appropriate proceedings in the civil companyrt.
The High Court came to the companyclusion that the proceedings under Section 145 CrPC were totally misconceived in the facts and circumstances of the case and directed that possession of the premises should be restored to the appellants, and pursuant to such direction, possession in fact had been delivered to the appellants on 16.9.1995.
Thereafter, as breach of peace was apprehended relating to the possession of the building, the Revenue Divisional Officer initiated proceedings under Section 145 CrPC and finally disposed of the said criminal proceedings by holding that the Republic School was in lawful possession of the building.
It was also prayed in the aforesaid petition that, since there has been gross mismanagement in managing the affairs of the School, the Government should be directed to take over the management of the educational institution in public interest in exercise of the power under Section 60 of the Act.
By a review petition being filed, the learned Single Judge modified his earlier direction and came to hold that it would be open for the State Government to take appropriate action under Section 60 of the Act and pass appropriate order thereon after holding due enquiry.
So far as the findings arrived at by the High Court on the question of title of the appellants as well as the direction issued by the High Court to hold an enquiry under Section 60 of the Act are companycerned, we find companysiderable force in the submission made by Mr. Rao, learned Counsel for the appellants.
On getting possession thereof, the appellants approached the companypetent authority under the Act to start a new school in the premises and obtained permission thereof by order dated 23.5.1996.
Two inhabitants of the locality where the Republic School was companytinuing, filed a writ petition before the Andhra Pradesh High Court seeking a direction to the educational authorities to take possession of the premises and to companytinue the Republic School in the said building.
The appellants purchased the said building under two registered sale deeds dated 25.2.1995 and 2.3.1995.
15976 of 1996 Admittedly, in the disputed premises in the city of Hyderabad, a school was running for the last so many years with the name Republic High School.
This order of the Magistrate was challenged by the appellants before the High Court by invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.
On appeal being carried, the Division Bench dismissed the appeal.
But so far as the direction that the Republic High School should companytinue in the building, the review order companyfirmed the same.
17419 of 1995 as modified in Review Petition No.
Hence the present appeal.
