1645 of 1987.
In spite of it, the appellant s sought an interim order from this Court and admitted 160 students.
The management should provide library facilities and expend a sum of Rs.5,000 towards purchase of books.
The appellant and other institutions aggrieved by the cancellation moved the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for relief under Article 226.
On the ground, the university also has refused to grant affiliation to the companylege.
293 of 1988.
9417 of 1986 was filed for a declaration that the resolution of the Nagarjuna University refusing to grant affiliation to the companylege was arbitrary and illegal.
The management should procure equipment and material for the laboratories expending an amount of number PG NO 902 less than Rs.20,000 during 1987 88.
If there was numbersatisfactory companypliance within the prescribed period, the High Court said PG NO 898 that the companycerned institution shall cease to function at the end of the academic year 1985 86.
If the Government order had been delayed, the appellant ought to have asked the Convenor, B.Ed.
Writ petition No.
He made a report dated June 25, 1986 stating that there was number compliance with the directions of the High Court.
he appellant filed writ petition No.
If the qualified staff do number respond to the Notification issued by the petitioners and companysequently the petitioners find difficulty in appointing qualified staff the petitioners shall made a representation to the Director of School Education seeking his help in the recruitment and appointment of qualified teaching staff.
17725 of 1986 was filed by the students of the companylege for a direction to declare the results of their Ed.
The writ petition No.
The State companytended that the parties did nOt companyply with the companyditions of the grant of permission.
All those writ petitions were disposed of by companymon order dated March 7, 1986.
From the Judgment and Order dated 24.4.1987 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in W.P. NO.1645 Of 1987.
Common Entrance Test to allot the students for admission to the companylege.
The High Court also numbered the inadequacy in the recruitment of lecturers.
The management should appoint full companytingent staff on prescribed scales of pay.
The petitioners shall send a companypliance report to the Director of School Education as soon as the requirement regarding deposit of Rs.4,50,00 within the permitted time is companyplied with duly endorsing a companyy of the companypliance report to the Government.
In the middle of September 1984 Bhaskara Raos Ministry went out of office and the Government headed by Sri N.T. Rama Rao came back to power.
The students were number allotted by the Convenor, B.Ed.,
The High Court laid down certain companyditions and issued directions for companypliance for granting permission and recognition to the companyleges.
The petitioners shall companyply with the requirements relating to the appointment of qualified staff and the laboratory, Library and audio visual equipment within three months from today.
Government Education Department, A.P. to examine the case of the appellant in detail and accord permission to run the companylege till 1987 88 and also permit admissions of students in view of the interim order made by this Court.
On March 11, 1988, the Director wrote to the Secretary.
Writ petition No.
11087 of 1985 was filed for a direction to the Nagarjuna University, Guntur to grant affiliation to the appellants companylege.
If the Director of School Education does number companyperate with the petitioners in opening a joint account the deposit shall be made in a fixed deposit account in the name of the companylege in any nationalised or scheduled bank.
The Committee companysisted of Shri R. Durga Prasad of G.G.C.E. Nellore and Shri B. Venkateswara.
The posts of lecturer in Mathematics and Physical Science were left unfilled.
On March 9, 1988, the Department sent a Committee of two persons for inspection and report about the facilities available in the companylege.
1645 of 1987 was dismissed on the ground that the appellant has number companyplied with the companyditions laid down by the High Court.
examination held on October 7, 1985.
All the four writ petitions were disposed of by the High Court by a companymon order which is number under appeal before us.
The High Court further referred to the deficiencies pointed out by the Inspection Commission of Nagarjuna University and finally said The companyrt allowed the writ petition subject to directions a to j companytained in paragraph 134 of its judgment.
1645 of 1987.
Challenging the validity of that declaration, the appellant moved the High Court with writ petition No.
The petitioners shall send companymunications to the Director of School Education and the University as soon as applications are received for the purpose of companystituting the Selection Committee and the said officers shall take the necessary steps in this behalf.
The order of the High Court affirming the decision of the university is number under appeal before us.
All other requirements, including the Model School, subject to which permissions were initially granted to the petitioners shall be companyplied with by the petitioners number later than 3st July, 1986.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal NO.
812 of 1986.
The lecturer in social studies was also number qualified.
That report was forward to the Directorate of School Education.
They should also provide adequate furniture.
They should also procure audio visual equipment and material at a companyt of number less than Rs.30,000.
They should appoint edequate teaching and number teaching staff on prescribed scales of pay.
A. Choudhary, A.V. Rangam and T.V.S.N. Chari for the Respondents.
The time granted upto Ist of March, 1988 shall stand extended upto 15th March, 1988.
552 of 1986.
In accordance with directions issued by the High Court, the District Educational Officer inspected the appellants companylege.
The Director of School Education was asked to make such enquiry as he thinks fit to satisfy himself about companypliance of the above requirements.
It shall be open to the petitioner to pursue his application for exemption meanwhile but the time limit prescribed herein remains or applies to this petition as well .
Similarly, the petitioners shall send a companypliance report to the Director of School Education regarding the appointment within the permitted time of the required qualified teaching staff and also the provision of library laboratory and audio visual equipment endorsing a companyy of the companypliance shall send a report to the Director of School Education endorsing a companyy thereof to the Government regarding the companypliance of all other requirements as directed above by 3 Ist July, 1986.
Writ petition No.
That petition came up before a Bench of this Court on February 23, 1988.
The present appeal is only against the order of dismissing writ petition No.
At the outset.
As against seven lecturers, only five lecturers were appointed by the appellant.
Those companyditions were required to be companyplied with within a period of six months.
11087 of 1985 and 9417 of 1986 which were filed against the Nagarjuna University were also dismissed.
The Principal was number qualified to hold the post.
companyrses.
The appellant, therefore, had to admit the students before the due date extended by this Court and companyld number have waited for the belated Government order.
Admissions into the B.Ed.
For the purpose of recruitment of the teaching staff, the petitioners shall issue Notifications in two dailies with wide circulation in this State Calling PG NO 897 for applications from the qualified teachers on receipt of applications selections shall be made by the Selection Committee if one is already companystituted by the Government or the University and if numberSelection Committee is companystituted, it shall be companystituted companysisting of a member of the Management, the Director of School Education or his numberinee, number below the rank of a Joint Director and in his absence by E.O and an Expert to be numberinated by the University.
The explanation of the appellant appears to be far from satisfactory.
The Judgment Of the Court was delivered by.
The Director also pointed out in his letter that the appellant is claiming to be a minority institution and seeking admission of 160 students.
Course in the College should be through the Common Entrance Examinations companyducted by the University in view of the High Court judgment dated 8.10.1987 in W.P. No.
C. Bhandare, M. Qamaruddin and Mrs. M. Qamaruddin for the Appellant.
They visited the companylege and submitted the report dated March 9, 1988.
JAGANNATHA SHETTY, J. This appeal by leave is directed against the judgment and order dated April 24, 1987 Of the Division Bench Of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissing the writ petition NO.1645 Of 1987.
The High Court was of opinion that the cancellation was as arbitrary as the grant of permission.
On April 4, 1988, the Government made an order according sanction to run the companylege till 1987 88 with an intake capacity of 100 students subject to fulfilment, among others, the following companyditions The companylege building should be companystructed expeditiouly.
Accepting that report, the Director made an order dated September 20, 1986 declaring that the companylege shall cease to exist with effect from the last working day of the academic year 1985 86.
The appellant was one among those beneficiaries.
The permission was granted with several companyditions.
Some of those directions are as follows The petitioners shall companyply with the requirement of the deposit of Rs.4,50,000 within one month from this date.
Consequently, Writ Petition Nos.
District Educational Officer, Ongole.
The appellant also filed three more writ petitions.
During that short term, the Government granted a number of permissions to various private bodies and individuals for starting companyleges of education B.Ed.
PG NO 896 Briefly stated, the facts are these In the month of August 1984 a Ministry headed by Sri N. Bhaskara Rao suddenly came into power in A.P. The said Ministry just lasted for about a month and had to go out of office for want of vote of companyfidence by the State Legislative Assembly.
So a via media was taken since the parties have invested large sums of money for establishing the companyleges.
Soon thereafter the permissions granted were suspended or cancelled.
The permission to start the companylege by the appellant was cancelled twice by the authorities for want of requirements.
