Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 46 (1.48 seconds)
Documents citing Andhra Kesari Education Society vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors. on 22 November, 1983

The Government Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. ... vs St. Anthony'S Educational Society, ... on 23 April, 1991

11. The decision as to the need Under Section 20 (3) (a) has to be taken by the Government. It is stated across the bar that the number of seats available in the degree colleges in Guntur will be around 500. The Government will have to necessarily collect statistics as to the 'need' in Guntur district, as a whole if it is not treated as a local area. If Narasaraopet can be considered as a local area, they must also collect statistics with regard to the need of that area. It is not for us to decide whether Guntur district should be taken as a unit or Narasaraopet Division should be taken as a unit. It is for the Government to take a decision in that behalf. We find that in the decision of this court in Andhra Kesari Educational Society, Guntur v. Government of Andhra Pradesh (2 supra), decided by Jeevan Reddy, J. (as he then was) and Sardar Ali Khan, J.), it was assumed that the district could be taken as a unit. There, the district concerned was Prakasam district. While coming to the conclusion that there is need or otherwise for any locality, the Government could also take into consideration the reports, if any, already submitted by the Committee of the University as also the District Educational Officers or the Regional Deputy Directors of Education or other officers. In the present case, in fact, the said reports of the committee and the Director are to the effect that there is a need in the locality, viz., Narasaraopet Revenue Division. It does not appear from the impugned order that the correctness or otherwise of the saidreports has been considered by the Govt. It is well-settled that if a decision is taken with regard to a fact or discretion of the Government is exercised by not taking relevant factors into consideration or by considering irrelevant factors, the decision is liable to be quashed or the discretion exercised declared bad and the matter is to be ordinarily remitted once again to the authority. In the present case, when the Government came to the conclusion that there was no need in the locality, viz., Guntur district, they have not considered whether the Revenue Division of Narasaraopet should be treated as a separate locality and they have also not adverted to any statistics with regard to the need of Guntur district or Narasaraopet Revenue Division. It would be incumbent on the Government to come to the conclusion basing upon how many schools are started every year, how many extra teachers are required every year and in what subject. From the material papers filed by the Government, it is clear that even according to them, 25 private unaided institutions out of the 47 B.Ed. colleges have been declared to be substandard institutions established without providing infrastructure and teaching staff. It is not known whether the three existing institutions in Guntur district belong to that category or not.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 21 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

The Secretary To Government Education ... vs Society For St. Ann'S Mehdipatnam, ... on 25 March, 1991

In fact in Andhra Kesari Education Society v. Government of A. P., above referred to, it has been clearly laid down by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Madhava Reddy, C.J. and Sardar Ali Khan, J. that when the legislative policy in S.20(3)(a) states that the requirement of the locality is the criterion, the Government cannot take a decision contrary to the legislative policy. The learned Judges observed that there may be thousand educated unemployed but so long as large number of illiterate persons seek to educate themselves and apply for admission into educational institutions and when educational institutions are proposed to be started by persons interested in making the Nation more educated and when they are prepared to provide facilities envisaged by the statute, the State cannot reject permission. It cannot deny educational facilities to the people of the locality. When the applicants are able to provide the requisite facilities as envisaged by the Act and sufficient number of students are seeking admission, the Government is legally bound to grant permission to start such educational institutions. As long as there is need for educational institutions in the 'locality', any refusal on grounds of executive policy, contrary to legislative policy or fundamental rights of the citizens to educate themselves, would, in our opinion, be bad. While citizens cannot insist upon Government to provide educational facilities at the cost of the State and the State may very well be within its bounds in not starting schools, colleges and educational institutions, the State cannot deny the right of the citizen to educate themselves and to establish such institutions.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 5 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Society Of St. Ann'S And The Rayalaseema ... vs The Secretary To Government, Education ... on 13 July, 1993

58. A similar question as to whether a Christian Minority had an unrestricted right to establish an educational institution of its choice without reference to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982, came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in Andhra Kesari Educational Society v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, 1987 (2) APLJ 374. The learned Judges answered the question in the negative in the following terms:
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 63 - Cited by 4 - P V Reddi - Full Document

The Government Of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By Its ... vs Emmanuel Teacher Training Institute, ... on 14 September, 2001

21. Many arguments were directed relying on few reported decisions that such policy in respect of the teacher training institutes was not a sound policy and could not be countenanced. More particularly, we may make mention of only two cases, viz., Andhra Kesari Education Society v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, and Secretary, Government Education Department, Andhra Pradesh v. Society for St. Ann's, Mehdipatnam, . We will not go into that subject because the teamed Judge has left it to the State Government to decide all the applications afresh. We do not wish to limit or control the discretion of the State Government because there may be a case where the teachers' training institution may be absolutely unnecessary considering the existence of the other institutions, the element of unfair competition or even because of the institution not enjoying proper reputation. There would be many individual factors even besides the guidelines. We would only say that we are in complete agreement with the learned single Judge in his directions to decide every application afresh in the light of the observations made by him. We also add that while deciding these applications, the observations made in this judgment shall also be taken into consideration. We, therefore, choose to dismiss all the appeals filed by the State Government and allow the writ petitions filed by the institutes except the following.
Madras High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 6 - V S Sirpurkar - Full Document

M/S.Senthil Education Society vs The Member Secretary on 4 March, 2011

18.The Division Bench of our High court has in the authority cited above, also referred to two decisions of Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in AIR 1984 A.P. 251 in Andhra Kesari Education Society v. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh and AIR 1991 A.P. 311 in Secretary, Govt. Education Department, Andhra Pradesh v. Society for St. Ann's, Mehdipatnam wherein, such policy in respect of the teacher training institutes was held to be not a sound policy and could not be countenanced.
Madras High Court Cites 37 - Cited by 1 - K B Vasuki - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next