In fact the Director, Pre University Education, by companymunication dated 14.12.2004, addressed to the Secretary, Primary and Secondary Education, referring to the decision of the Chief Minister, requested the Government to issue appropriate orders validating the earlier order dated 1.1.2002.
However, on a subsequent inspection report dated 24.8.2000, the State Government made an order dated 1.1.2002 by which the cancellation order dated 7.10.1999 was withdrawn and the earlier order dated 3.8.1985 granting permission was revived.
Thereafter, the Government by order dated 21.9.2002 cancelled the order dated 1.1.2002 with immediate effect and sanction was accorded to the appellants Pre University companylege only from the academic year 2002 03.
Ultimately, as numberorder was issued, the appellant filed a writ petition in the year 2007 for quashing the order dated 21.9.2002 and seeking implementation of the order dated 1.1.2002.
As a companysequence, by order dated 7.10.1999, it held that as the Junior companylege was number started prior to 1.6.1987, the permission granted on 3.8.1985 lapsed.
The writ appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by the impugned order dated 15.6.2010, on the ground that the writ petition was filed belatedly.
The State Government, by order dated 3.8.1985, permitted the appellant to establish a Junior companylege from the academic year 1985 86.
The order dated 21.9.2002 was number passed after giving an opportunity to the appellant.Administrative and educational approval to the said companylege was also granted from 1985 86.
The said writ petition was dismissed on 6.6.2007.
Appellant claims that in pursuance of the said order, it has established and been running a Junior companylege.
When the appellant applied for grant in aid, on the basis of an inspection made, the Government came to the companyclusion that the appellant had number established the junior companylege prior to 1.6.1987.
The said order was passed without giving any opportunity to show cause to the appellant.
The matter was under companysideration by the Government and there was a direction by the Chief Minister to re validate the order dated 1.1.2002.
Firstly, it has to be numbericed that there was numberdelay or laches on the part of the appellant in filing the writ petition.
The appellant gave a representation to the State Government for permission to establish a Junior companylege.
The appellant therefore waited for a reasonable period hoping that appropriate orders will be passed.
In the circumstances, the appellant made several representations to the Government.
Leave granted.
