{"id":93547,"date":"2000-08-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2000-08-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000"},"modified":"2018-11-22T05:26:02","modified_gmt":"2018-11-21T23:56:02","slug":"govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000","title":{"rendered":"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000<\/div>\n
Author: M J Rao<\/div>\n
Bench: M.J.Rao K.G Balakrishnana<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil) 2422  of  1997\n\n\n\nPETITIONER:\nGOVT.  OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nG.V.K.\tGIRLS HIGH SCHOOL\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t08\/08\/2000\n\nBENCH:\nM.J.Rao K.G Balakrishnana\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
L…..I………T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T..J<\/p>\n
      J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
      M.  JAGANNADHA RAO, J.\n<\/p>\n
      This is an appeal by the State of Andhra Pradesh<\/p>\n
      against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High<\/p>\n
      Court  of\t Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No.  1745  of
\n1995<\/span><\/p>\n
      dated 6.8.1996 affirming the judgment of the learned<\/p>\n
      Single Judge of that Court in Writ petition 15879\/90<\/p>\n
      dated 27.7.1995.\n<\/p>\n
\n      The following are the facts:\n<\/p>\n
      The respondent-school was admitted to grant-in-aid<\/p>\n
      in GO.347 (Ed.) dated 1.8.86 w.e.f.  1.9.85 to 29.2.86<\/p>\n
      under AP.Act I\/82.  On the ground that there were some<\/p>\n
      complaints   against  various    schools,\t  Government
\nappointed<\/p>\n
      a\t Committee on 24.2.88 under GO.220 and this was made
\na<\/p>\n
      statutory Committee by Andhra Pradesh Act 22\/88.\tThe<\/p>\n
      Committee cleared the respondent-School but still the<\/p>\n
      arrears for the period 1.9.85 to 31.10.89 for the Head<\/p>\n
      Mistress\tand  from 1.3.86 to 31.10.89 for  the  staff
\nwere<\/p>\n
      not paid.\t Hence, the present writ petition was filed.<\/p>\n
      After the Writ petition was filed, GO.138 (Ed.) dated<\/p>\n
      25.4.94 was issued refusing to pay these arrears.<\/p>\n
      The learned Single Judge allowed the Writ petition<\/p>\n
      holding that the respondent- school was entitled to<\/p>\n
      payment of ‘arrears’ of grant-in-aid and quashed<\/p>\n
      G.O.No.138 dated 25.4.94.\t Then the State came forward<\/p>\n
      with a legislation,- after the said judgment, – by way<\/p>\n
      of Andhra Pradesh Act 34\/95 (published in the Gazette<\/p>\n
      on 20.9.95) with retrospective effect from 17.10.89<\/p>\n
      which permitted denial of ‘arrears’ of grant-in-aid<\/p>\n
      whenever\t such  arrears\twere   claimed\tunder\t“any
\njudgment,<\/p>\n
      decree or order of Court or other authority or any<\/p>\n
      order issued by Government”.  In the Writ Appeal, the<\/p>\n
      State relied upon the said legislation to get over the<\/p>\n
      judgment dated 27.7.95 of the learned Single Judge<\/p>\n
      directing arrears of grant-in-aid to be paid but the<\/p>\n
      Division Bench held that the legislature could not set<\/p>\n
      aside  the  judgment of the High Court by\t Act  34\/95.
\nThe<\/p>\n
      judgment was confirmed and the Writ Appeal was<\/p>\n
      dismissed.  It is against the said judgment that this<\/p>\n
      appeal is preferred by the State.\t During the pendency
\nof<\/p>\n
      this  appeal  stay  of  the  High\t Court’s  order\t was
\nrefused.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      For appreciating the points raised in this appeal,<\/p>\n
      it  is  necessary\t to refer to the provisions  of\t the
\nthree<\/p>\n
      statutes\tand  the various government  orders  dealing
\nwith<\/p>\n
      grant-in-aid to schools in the State of Andhra Pradesh<\/p>\n
      chronologically in so far as they are relevant for the<\/p>\n
      case before us.\n<\/p>\n
\n      Andhra Pradesh Act 1\/82<\/p>\n
      The Andhra Pradesh Education Act ( A.P.  Act I of<\/p>\n
      1982)  deals  with  ‘grant-in-aid’   Chapter  VIII   (
\nsections<\/p>\n
      42  to  47).   Section 42 states that  the  Government
\nshall,<\/p>\n
      within  the limits of its economic capacity, set apart
\na<\/p>\n
      sum  of money annually for being given as grant-in-aid
\nto<\/p>\n
      local  authority\tand private institutions  recognised
\nfor<\/p>\n
      the aforesaid purpose.  Section 43 deals with the<\/p>\n
      authorities which may sanction the grant, ( section 44<\/p>\n
      has been omitted in 1983), section 45 deals with the<\/p>\n
      manner  of  submitting  applications for\tsanction  of
\ngrant<\/p>\n
      and the conditions to be fulfilled on such sanction.<\/p>\n
      Sub-clause (1) of section 46 gives power to Government<\/p>\n
      to withhold, reduce or withdraw grant, notwithstanding<\/p>\n
      anything in the Chapter, on inquiry, (i) on the ground<\/p>\n
      of non-availability of funds or (ii) because of the<\/p>\n
      conduct and efficiency and the financial condition of<\/p>\n
      such institution.\t The section provides opportunity to
\nbe<\/p>\n
      given.   Sub-clause  (2)\tof section 46  states  that,
\nwithout<\/p>\n
      prejudice to the generality of the provisions of sub-<\/p>\n
      section (1) or any other provisions of the Act, the<\/p>\n
      Government may, after making necessary inquiry,<\/p>\n
      withhold,\t  reduce  or  withdraw\t any  grant  if\t the
\nmanagement<\/p>\n
      of the Institution is guilty of various acts specified<\/p>\n
      in  the sub-clause.  Section 47 deals with the  manner
\nof<\/p>\n
      utilisation of funds and movable property of private<\/p>\n
      institution.\n<\/p>\n
\n      GO.238 (Ed).dated 27.5.86 and GO.347 (Ed.)dated 1.8.86<\/p>\n
      Government issued G.O.238(Ed.) dated 27.5.86<\/p>\n
      stating  that all schools which were validly opened on
\nor<\/p>\n
      after 1.4.1977 and which had completed 5 years in<\/p>\n
      respect of boys’ schools and 3 years in respect of<\/p>\n
      girls’   schools\t etc.\tare  to\t  be   admitted\t  to
\ngrant-in-aid.\n<\/p>\n
      As already stated, the respondent-school was admitted<\/p>\n
      to grant-in-aid as per G.O.347 (Ed.) dated 1.8.86 with<\/p>\n
      effect  from  1.9.85  to 29.2.86 as permitted  by\t Act
\nI\/82.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      Complaints   and\tGO.220\t dated\t24.2.88\t  appointing
\nCommittee.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      On 24.2.88, Government issued G.O.  220 stating<\/p>\n
      that   Government\t had   received\t various  complaints
\nagainst<\/p>\n
      several schools which were receiving grant-in-aid even<\/p>\n
      though they did not satisfy the necessary conditions.<\/p>\n
      It was further stated that the Government had,<\/p>\n
      therefore, constituted a High Level Committee in G.O.<\/p>\n
      Rt.No.220 (Ed.) dated 24.2.88 to look into every case<\/p>\n
      of grant-in-aid and make specific recommendations.<\/p>\n
      Andhra  Pradesh  Act  22\/88:  Statutory  Committee  to
\ninquire into complaints:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      Soon after 24.2.88, the Government felt that a GO<\/p>\n
      was not sufficient to enable the making of inquiries<\/p>\n
      into  complaints\tand that legislation was  necessary.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It,<\/p>\n
      therefore,came forward with the Andhra Pradesh Private<\/p>\n
      Educational  Institutions\t  Grant-in-Aid\t(Regulation)
\nAct,<\/p>\n
      1988(AP Act 22 of 1988) which was published in the<\/p>\n
      Gazette on 29.8.88 and under sub-clause (3) of Section
\n1<\/span><\/p>\n
      this  Act was given effect from 22.7.1985.  Section  3
\nof<\/p>\n
      the Act reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      “Section 3(1):  Regulation of grant- in-aid to private
\neducational institutions:\n<\/p>\n
      Notwithstanding anything contained in G.O.  Ms.No.238,
\nEducation  (SSE)  Department, dated the 27th May,  1986\t and
\nGO.Ms.\t No.424,  Education (CE) Department, dated the\t19th
\nSeptember, 1985, –\n<\/p>\n
      (a)  no  private educational institution other than  a
\ncollege\t established after the Ist April, 1977 land existing
\non   the  Ist  September,  1985\t  and  no  private   college
\nestablished  after  the Ist April, 1977 and existing on\t the
\nIst  March,  1985  shall be entitled to receive\t any  grant-
\nin-aid\tunless\tthe Committee constituted  in  GO.Rt.No.220,
\nEducation  (SSE-I) Department, dated the 24th February, 1988
\nrecommends that it may be admitted to grant-in-aid;  and<\/p>\n
      (b)  no  private educational institution other than  a
\nCollege\t which has been established after the Ist September,
\n1985 and no private college which has been established after
\nthe  Ist March, 1985 shall be entitled to receive any grant-
\nin-aid.\n<\/p>\n
      (2)  A private educational institution referred to  in
\nclause\t(a)  of\t sub-section  (1) in  favour  of  which\t the
\nCommittee  recommends  the release of grant-in-aid shall  be
\nentitled  to such grant only from the date it satisfies\t all
\nthe  conditions\t for admission to grant-in-aid specified  in
\nthe  Andhra  Pradesh Education Act, 1982 and the Rules\tmade
\nthereunder,  the grants-in-aid Code and the orders and other
\ninstructions  issued by the Government from time to time  in
\nthis behalf.”\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      Section 4 of the Act refers to release of grant-<\/p>\n
      in-aid in respect of certain additional sections and<\/p>\n
      posts.\tSection\t 5  refers  to\tseeking\t refund\t  of
\ngrant-in-\n<\/p>\n
      aid if the Committee in G.O.220(ed.) dated 24.2.88<\/p>\n
      determines that the institution wrongly received aid.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Section\t6   said   the\t  Act\twill   have   effect
\nnotwithstanding<\/p>\n
      anything\tin  any law, judgment etc.  Section 7  deals
\nwith<\/p>\n
      validation.  Section 8 repeals the Ordinance of 1988.<\/p>\n
      GO.124  (Ed.)  dated  27.1.89  &\tGO.326\t(Ed.)  dated
\n17.10.89:   The Committee rejects complaints against several
\nschools including respondent-School:<\/p>\n
      Under a G.O.  124 (Ed.) dated 27.1.89 a Committee<\/p>\n
      was constituted as stated in the above Act 22\/88.\t It<\/p>\n
      appears that the Committee met and conducted inquiries<\/p>\n
      into  complaints\tand  gave  various  recommendations.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
G.O.\n<\/p>\n
      326 (Ed.) dated 17.10.89 was thereafter issued stating<\/p>\n
      that   the  Committee  had   recommended\trelease\t  of
\ngrant-in-\n<\/p>\n
      aid to 59 secondary schools and other specified<\/p>\n
      elementary, oriental schools, sections whose names are<\/p>\n
      enumerated in the Annexure – “subject to various<\/p>\n
      conditions” (i) to (vi) and that Rs.63 lakhs was being<\/p>\n
      sanctioned to these schools enumerated in the Annexure<\/p>\n
      to this G.O.  for the period 1.11.89 to 29.2.90.\tBut<\/p>\n
      para  12\tof  the\t GO.  is  important  and  stated  as
\nfollows:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
<\/blockquote>\n
      “Regarding  payment  of  arrears to  the\tschools\t now
\nadmitted to grant-in-aid, orders will be issued separately.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
      A point has been raised as to whether this para is an<\/p>\n
      admission\t that arrears are due and will be paid.\t  As
\nto<\/p>\n
      the  meaning  of\tthe word ‘now’ used in\tthis  order,
\nthere<\/p>\n
      is again some controversy and we shall explain it a<\/p>\n
      little later.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      The  Writ\t petition for arrears and the  GO.138  (Ed.)
\ndated 25.4.94 refusing arrears:<\/p>\n
      As the arrears of grant-in-aid were not released,<\/p>\n
      the Ist respondent filed W.P.15879\/90, seeking release<\/p>\n
      of  the arrears for the period 1.9.85 to 31.10.89\t for
\nthe<\/p>\n
      Headmistress and for 1.3.86 to 31.10.89 for the other<\/p>\n
      staff.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      As already stated, during the pendency of the Writ<\/p>\n
      petition\tGovernment  issued a specific  order  GO.138
\n(Ed.)<\/p>\n
      dated  25.4.94  refusing to pay the arrears.   In\t the
\nsaid<\/p>\n
      GO,  Government  referred\t to para 12  of\t GO.326(Ed.)
\ndated<\/p>\n
      17.10.89 as set out above and said that in that para<\/p>\n
      Government had not made any commitment to pay arrears.<\/p>\n
      It stated:\n<\/p>\n
\n      “It  will be seen from the Government Order cited that
\nthe  Government\t have not made any specific commitment\twith
\nregard to the arrears.”\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      Government  then said that after examining the  matter
\nin<\/p>\n
      detail in the light of “the right of the schools for<\/p>\n
      grant-in-aid or arrears therein” and also the ‘present<\/p>\n
      financial position’ of the State Government and taking<\/p>\n
      into account the fact that there will be the extra<\/p>\n
      expense  of  about  4.5 crores, if arrears are  to  be
\npaid,<\/p>\n
      the  Government  decided\t“not   pay  arrears”.\t The
\nvalidity<\/p>\n
      of this GO was, therefore, gone into by the learned<\/p>\n
      Single Judge.\n<\/p>\n
\n      Learned Single Judge directs arrears to be paid:<\/p>\n
      Before the learned Single Judge, apart from<\/p>\n
      relying on sections 42 to 45 of AP Act 1\/82 and the<\/p>\n
      retrospectivity given to AP Act 22\/88, and the various<\/p>\n
      GOs, the respondent school relied also upon the above<\/p>\n
      para 12 to contend that the entitlement of the schools<\/p>\n
      for arrears prior to 17.10.89 was re-affirmed in this<\/p>\n
      GO.326 but that what the GO meant in para 12 was that<\/p>\n
      the further order contemplated therein was only for<\/p>\n
      working  out the mode of payment.\t The Government,  on
\nthe<\/p>\n
      other hand, contended before the learned Single Judge<\/p>\n
      that  in\tthis  para  12\tof  GO\t326  Government\t had
\nidentified<\/p>\n
      these schools as eligible to receive grant-in-aid<\/p>\n
      ‘afresh’ and it was not a case of re-affirmation of a<\/p>\n
      previous eligibility.  Of course, question is whether<\/p>\n
      this  contention of the Government can fit into the GO
\nif<\/p>\n
      para    12    refers   to\t   payment    of    arrears.
\nRespondent-school<\/p>\n
      contends that if it was a fresh admission to grant-in-<\/p>\n
      aid, there was indeed no need at all to refer to any<\/p>\n
      arrears.\tWe shall revert to this aspect again.<\/p>\n
      The learned Single Judge had, therefore, to go<\/p>\n
      into the validity of GO 138 dated 25.4.94 denying<\/p>\n
      arrears.\t(By that date Ap Act 34\/95 had not been<\/p>\n
      passed).\t The learned Judge allowed the Writ petition
\non<\/p>\n
      27.7.1995 and directed payment of arrears and declared<\/p>\n
      GO.138(Ed.) dated 25.4.94 as inoperative, stating that<\/p>\n
      under sections 42, 43 and 45 of the Act 1\/82, the<\/p>\n
      statute conferred a right to receive the grant-in-aid<\/p>\n
      and that initially grant-in-aid was released in favour<\/p>\n
      of the petitioner for the period 1.9.85 to 26.2.86 as<\/p>\n
      stated in GO.347 (Ed.) dated 1.8.86, that later on in<\/p>\n
      view of complaints against various schools, Government<\/p>\n
      appointed a Committee in GO.220 dated 24.2.1988, the<\/p>\n
      Committee\t cleared  the case of the  writ\t petitioner,
\nalong<\/p>\n
      with other schools in GO.326 dated 17.10.89 and while<\/p>\n
      the Committee was inquiring into the matter, the right<\/p>\n
      to ‘arrears’ remained in abeyance till the writ<\/p>\n
      petitioner was cleared by the Committee, that once the<\/p>\n
      favourable  recommendation by the Committee was given,
\nit<\/p>\n
      was  nothing  but\t a retro-active declaration  of\t the
\nright<\/p>\n
      to  receive  the grant-in-aid from  29.2.86.   Learned
\nJudge<\/p>\n
      also  held  that\tin  para 12 of the  GO.\t  326  dated
\n17.10.89,<\/p>\n
      the Government had agreed to pay the arrears and,<\/p>\n
      therefore, they could not have issued GO.138 dated<\/p>\n
      25.4.94 refusing to release the arrears because of<\/p>\n
      ‘present\tfinancial  position’ ( i.e.  in 1994).\t The
\nwrit<\/p>\n
      petition was allowed.\n<\/p>\n
      Act  34\/95  says\tarrears\t need not  be  paid  as\t per
\njudgment or Government order:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      We have already stated that after the above<\/p>\n
      judgment of the learned Single Judge, the Legislature<\/p>\n
      passed   Andhra  Pradesh\t  Educational\tInstitutions
\nGrant-in-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Aid  (Regulation)\t Supplementary Provision  Act,\t1995
\n(Act<\/p>\n
      34\/95).\tIt was published in the Gazette on  20.9.95.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It<\/p>\n
      was given retrospective effect from 17.10.89.  It<\/p>\n
      contains only two sections.  There is a long preamble<\/p>\n
      setting out the gist of the various GOs.set out above.<\/p>\n
      Section 1 deals with retrospectively and section 2 of<\/p>\n
      this Act, declares that arrears payable by virtue of<\/p>\n
      “any judgment or decree of Court or other authority or<\/p>\n
      any  order issued by Government” need not be paid even
\nif<\/p>\n
      it had become payable to the schools enumerated in GO<\/p>\n
      326  dated  17.10.89 read with Go 178 dated  23.07.90.
\nWe<\/p>\n
      have extracted section 2 lower down in this judgment.<\/p>\n
      Division Bench says Act 34\/95 cannot overrule judgment
\nof learned Single Judge:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      It was this Act 34\/95 that was relied upon by the<\/p>\n
      Government  before  the  Division Bench  in  the\tWrit
\nAppeal<\/p>\n
      to deny the arrears.  The Division Bench, as already<\/p>\n
      stated,  held  that once the rights of the  respondent
\nfor<\/p>\n
      release of grant-in-aid got crystallised by way of a<\/p>\n
      judgment, the Legislature could not have set aside the<\/p>\n
      judgment\t  by   passing\t a   law   and\t  therefore,
\nnotwithstanding<\/p>\n
      the  new\tlaw,  the  State was  bound  to\t honour\t the
\njudgment<\/p>\n
      of the learned Single Judge.  The Writ Appeal was<\/p>\n
      dismissed.  However, the Bench did not go into the<\/p>\n
      question whether Act 34\/95 removed the basis of the<\/p>\n
      judgment\t of   the   learned    Single\tJudge\twith
\nretrospective<\/p>\n
      effect.\n<\/p>\n
\n      Points arising in this appeal:\n<\/p>\n
\n      In this appeal, we have heard learned Senior<\/p>\n
      counsel for the State of Andhra Pradesh Smt.<\/p>\n
      K.Amareswari  and\t learned counsel for the  respondent
\nSri<\/p>\n
      B.  Kanta Rao.\n<\/p>\n
      The following points arise for consideration:<\/p>\n
      (1) whether the State can successfully rely on A.P.Act<\/p>\n
      34\/95  to\t deny  the arrears of  grant-in-aid  if\t the
\narrears<\/p>\n
      had become payable under Act 1\/82 and Act 22\/88, and<\/p>\n
      once  the\t Committee  appointed under  Act  22\/88\t had
\ncleared<\/p>\n
      the school?\n<\/p>\n
      (2) Whether, in the facts of the case, the arrears of<\/p>\n
      the grant-in-aid could be denied by Legislation even<\/p>\n
      after  the  right\t to  the same was  declared  by\t the
\nlearned<\/p>\n
      Single Judge of the High Court?\n<\/p>\n
\n      Point 1:\n<\/p>\n
      We have noticed that the period for which the<\/p>\n
      dispute between the parties survives is regarding<\/p>\n
      arrears  for the period from 1.9.85 to 31.10.89 so far
\nas<\/p>\n
      the post of Head-Mistress of this school is concerned<\/p>\n
      and for 1.3.86 to 31.10.89 so far as the staff is<\/p>\n
      concerned.\n<\/p>\n
\n      We shall first refer to the effect of Act I\/82 on<\/p>\n
      the facts of this case.  Section 42 to 45 of Act 1\/82<\/p>\n
      contain  the  main  provisions  as  to  admission\t  to
\ngrant-in-\n<\/p>\n
      aid.  In other words, in respect of the schools which<\/p>\n
      satisfy the prescribed eligibility conditions as<\/p>\n
      prescribed in the GOs, a statutory right to receive<\/p>\n
      grant-in-aid  is clearly created by sections 42 to  45
\nof<\/p>\n
      the said Act.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      No doubt, section 46 of Act 1\/1982 permits<\/p>\n
      withholding   or\treduction  or\twithdrawal  of\t the
\ngrant-in-\n<\/p>\n
      aid.  We have already referred to the gist of this<\/p>\n
      provision but now we shall extract the same:<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      “S.46–Power  of\tGovernment  to withhold,  reduce  or
\nwithdraw grant:–\n<\/p>\n
      (1)  Notwithstanding  anything  in this  Chapter,\t the
\nGovernment  may,  after such enquiry as they may  deem\tfit,
\nwithhold,  reduce  or  withdraw\t any  grant  payable  to  an
\neducational  institution  having regard to the funds at\t the
\ndisposal of the Government or the conduct and efficiency and
\nthe financial condition of such institution, after giving an
\nopportunity  to the manager of the institution concerned  of
\nmaking\ta representation against such withholding, reduction
\nor withdrawal.\n<\/p>\n
      (2)  Without  prejudice  to   the\t generality  of\t the
\nprovisions of sub-section (1) or any other provision of this
\nAct, the Government may, after such enquiry as they may deem
\nfit,  withhold, reduce or withdraw any grant payable to\t any
\neducational  institution  if the manager of the\t institution
\nconcerned,–\n<\/p>\n
      (i) fails to fulfil or any of the conditions of grant;<\/p>\n
      (ii)  denies admission to any citizen on grounds\tonly
\nof religion, race, caste, language or any of them;<\/p>\n
      (iii)  allows any employee of the institution to\ttake
\npart  in any agitation intended to bring or attempt to bring
\ninto hatred or contempt, or intended to excite or attempt to
\nexcite\tdisaffection towards, the Government established  by
\nlaw in India;\n<\/p>\n
      (iv)  directly or indirectly encourages any propaganda
\nor  practice of wounding the religious feelings of any class
\nof  citizens  of  India\t or insulting the  religion  or\t the
\nreligious beliefs of that class;<\/p>\n
      (v) is guilty of falsification of registers, of misuse
\nof  funds  for purposes other than those for which they\t are
\ncollected;\n<\/p>\n
      (vi)  fails  to remedy within such reasonable time  as
\nmay  be specified by the competent authority, the defects in
\nthe maintenance of accounts pointed out by the auditors;  or<\/p>\n
      (vii)  fails to restore, within the time specified  by
\nthe  competent\tauthority, an employee whose  services\thave
\nbeen  wrongfully  dispensed  with or fails to  pay  him\t any
\narrears\t of salary or other benefits when directed to do  so
\nby the competent authority.\n<\/p>\n
      (3) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, every
\norder passed under this section shall be final and shall not
\nbe questioned in any court of law.”<\/p>\n
      It will be seen that the power mentioned in the first<\/p>\n
      part of clause (1)(a) could be exercised after inquiry<\/p>\n
      by  the  State  having  regard to\t the  funds  at\t the
\ndisposal<\/p>\n
      of the Government.  Under the second part of clause<\/p>\n
      (1)(a),  this  power  could be  exercised\t based\tupon
\nconduct<\/p>\n
      and   efficiency\t or  financial\t position   of\t the
\ninstitution<\/p>\n
      also after giving opportunity.  Under clause (2) of<\/p>\n
      section  46,  the\t power\tcould be  exercised  if\t the
\nmanager<\/p>\n
      had committed certain irregularities as found in an<\/p>\n
      inquiry where the manager is heard.  It is clear that<\/p>\n
      when Government appointed a Committee to go into<\/p>\n
      complaints, it was exercising the option under section<\/p>\n
      46(2).   So  far as section 46(1) is concerned,  there
\nare<\/p>\n
      no  proceedings  issued  under section  46(1)  and  no
\ninquiry<\/p>\n
      conducted under that provision.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Right to arrears flows from Act 1\/82 and Act 22\/88 and
\nCommittee;s  report  and  is not created by  any  Government
\norders:\n<\/p>\n
      It is not in dispute that after Act 1\/82, the<\/p>\n
      respondent-school\t was admitted to grant-in-aid  under
\nthe<\/p>\n
      said  Act\t in  GO 347(Ed.) dated\t1.8.86\tbecause\t the
\nschool<\/p>\n
      satisfied the conditions in GO 238(Ed.) dated 27.5.86.<\/p>\n
      Now, after complaints were received, the grant was<\/p>\n
      kept in abeyance and the cases of the respondent and<\/p>\n
      others were inquired into under section 46(2).<\/p>\n
      Initially,  the Government constituted a Committee  in
\nGO<\/p>\n
      220  dated 24.2.88.  Later by Act 22\/88, the Committee
\nwas<\/p>\n
      given statutory status to go into complaints.  It will
\nbe<\/p>\n
      noticed that the right to receive grant-in-aid for the<\/p>\n
      back years i.e.  from 22.7.85 was declared under Act<\/p>\n
      22\/88, contingent upon the recommendation of the<\/p>\n
      Committee.   This\t is  clear from\t section  3(2).\t  It
\nstates<\/p>\n
      that if the Committee recommends favourably, then the<\/p>\n
      grant is to be released in favour of an institution,<\/p>\n
      “from the date upon which it satisfies all the<\/p>\n
      conditions for admission to grant in aid specified in<\/p>\n
      the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982 and the Rules<\/p>\n
      made thereunder, or the grant in aid code or orders or<\/p>\n
      other  instructions issued by the Government from time
\nto<\/p>\n
      time”.  This clause, in our view, therefore directs<\/p>\n
      release of grant-in-aid from the date upon which the<\/p>\n
      school  satisfies\t the   eligibility  conditions.\t  As
\nalready<\/p>\n
      stated sub-clause (3) of section 1 made Act 22\/88<\/p>\n
      retrospective from 22.7.85.  Hence it is as if the<\/p>\n
      Committee constituted under Act 22\/88 was there from<\/p>\n
      1985.  In our view, once the Committee gave its<\/p>\n
      clearance, the decision would therefore be effective<\/p>\n
      from 22.7.1985 in respect of all the back years from<\/p>\n
      dates anterior to the passing of Act 22\/88, and the<\/p>\n
      school  would  be entitled to release of\tgrant-in-aid
\nfrom<\/p>\n
      the date on which it satisfies the conditions for<\/p>\n
      receiving grant-in-aid.\n<\/p>\n
\n      It is contended for the State of Andhra Pradesh<\/p>\n
      that section 3(2) is only prospective.  It is true<\/p>\n
      section\t3   does   not\t expressly  say\t  that\t the
\nrecommendation<\/p>\n
      will be retro-active but from the language of section<\/p>\n
      3(2)  referred to above and also because sub-section 3
\nof<\/p>\n
      section  1  says that the Act “be deemed to have\tcome
\ninto<\/p>\n
      force  on the 22nd July, 1985”, in our view, the right
\nis<\/p>\n
      retrospectively affirmed for the back years.  In other<\/p>\n
      words,   the   Committee’s   recommendations   as\t  to
\ncompliance<\/p>\n
      with conditions during various years from 1985 though<\/p>\n
      made  after  1988 were to be treated as  in  existence
\nfrom<\/p>\n
      various dates after 22.7.1985 and if the institution<\/p>\n
      satisfied the conditions of the Act 1\/1982 and also<\/p>\n
      conditions laid down in other GOs in the previous<\/p>\n
      years, the Committee’s recommendation in favour of any<\/p>\n
      school would be retroactive and will apply to those<\/p>\n
      back years.  That the right to arrears is affirmed by<\/p>\n
      section  3 is also clear from section 5 which  relates
\nto<\/p>\n
      an adverse recommendation of the Committee.  In cases<\/p>\n
      where the Committee accepted complaints, section 5<\/p>\n
      requires refund of amounts already paid.\tThus, Act<\/p>\n
      22\/88 provided for payment of arrears or for refund of<\/p>\n
      amounts paid.  That was the purpose in making the<\/p>\n
      provisions   of\tthat\tAct   retrospective   w.e.f.
\n22.7.1985.\n<\/p>\n
      In our view, these provisions of the Act, therefore,<\/p>\n
      clearly conferred a statutory right on the writ<\/p>\n
      petitioners to receive the grant-in-aid right from<\/p>\n
      22.7.85 onwards in the various years in which they<\/p>\n
      satisfied the conditions.\t The right to arrears thus<\/p>\n
      flows from the statutes and the Committee’s<\/p>\n
      recommendations  and  not from any Government  orders.
\nIn<\/p>\n
      other  words, the basic right to receive arrears\tdoes
\nnot<\/p>\n
      stem  from  any  Government order in  respect  of\t the
\nschools<\/p>\n
      enumerated in GO 326(Ed.) dated 17.10.89 read with GO<\/p>\n
      178(Ed.) dated 23.7.90.  The right stems from Act 1\/82<\/p>\n
      and Act 22\/88 and the findings of the Committee.\tThis<\/p>\n
      aspect becomes important when we come to deal with Act<\/p>\n
      34\/95  and  as to whether it has removed the basis  of
\nthe<\/p>\n
      judgment of the learned Single Judge.<\/p>\n
      We next come to para 12 of Go 326 dated 17.10.89.<\/p>\n
      This GO contained a list of 59 schools like the<\/p>\n
      respondent  wherein  it was stated that the  Committee
\nhad<\/p>\n
      given favourable recommendation in favour of the writ<\/p>\n
      petitioner and other institutions.  The GO stated that<\/p>\n
      these institutions would be entitled for release of<\/p>\n
      grant-in-aid w.e.f.  1.11.89 to 29.2.90 for the year<\/p>\n
      1989-90.\tIt, however, contained a note in para 12 as<\/p>\n
      follows:\n<\/p>\n
      “Regarding  payment  of  arrears\tto  the\t school\t now
\nadmitted to grant-in-aid, orders will be issued separately.”<\/p>\n
      In our view, the word “now” used in this GO does not<\/p>\n
      mean that these schools are identified as entitled to<\/p>\n
      grant-in-aid  for\t the first time in 1989 in  this  GO\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
326.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      This is clear from the fact that like section 3 of Act<\/p>\n
      22\/88, this GO also speaks of arrears.  If indeed the<\/p>\n
      previous orders relating to admission to grant-in-aid<\/p>\n
      were intended to be given a go bye as contended before<\/p>\n
      us for the State, the Government would not have<\/p>\n
      referred to the question of payment of arrears in this<\/p>\n
      GO  326.\t Therefore, the word “now” in our  view,  is
\nused<\/p>\n
      only to identify those schools etc referred to in<\/p>\n
      Annexure to the GO.326 and as cleared by the Committee<\/p>\n
      and was not intended to create a new prospective right<\/p>\n
      to receive grant-in-aid after 1989.  Such<\/p>\n
      identification would therefore clearly relate back to<\/p>\n
      22.7.85 which was the date from which Act 22\/88 became<\/p>\n
      retrospective.\n<\/p>\n
\n      Act 22\/95:  does not retrospectively remove the rights
\ncreated\t by  Act  1\/82\tread with Act 22\/88  read  with\t the
\nrecommendation:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      Now we shall finally come to section 2 of Act<\/p>\n
      34\/95.  The said Act was published in Gazette on<\/p>\n
      20.9.1995 after the judgment of the learned Single<\/p>\n
      Judge.  But it came into force from 17.10.89, the date
\nof<\/p>\n
      GO  326  which  said in para 12 that  the\t orders\t for
\narrears<\/p>\n
      would be passed separately.  Section 2 of this Act of<\/p>\n
      1995 reads as follows:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n      “Section 2:  No arrears of grant-in- aid payable:<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Notwithstanding  anything\t contained in any  judgment,
\ndecree\tor  order  of any Court or other authority,  or\t any
\norder  issued by the Government or any authority subordinate
\nto the Government, no arrears of grant-in-aid shall or shall
\neven  be  deemed  to be payable to any\tprivate\t educational
\ninstitution  admitted to grant-in-aid in pursuance of GO.326
\n(Ed.)  dated 17.10.89 and GO.No.178 (Ed.) dated 23.7.90\t for
\nthe  period  between Ist September, 1985 and  31st  October,
\n1989 and accordingly:-\n<\/p>\n
      (a) no suit or other proceeding shall be maintained or
\ncontinued in any Court against the Government or an;y person
\nor  authority  whatsoever for the payment of any arrears  of
\ngrant-in-aid for the said period;  and<\/p>\n
      (b)  no  Court  shall  enforce  any  decree  or  order
\ndirecting the payment of any arrears of grant-in-aid.”<\/p>\n
      The opening part of section 2 refer to the judgment or<\/p>\n
      decree  or order of any Court.  The second part  deals
\nwith<\/p>\n
      orders  of other authority, or any order of Government
\nor<\/p>\n
      Subordinate authority.  The second part deals with<\/p>\n
      rights created by Government orders.<\/p>\n
      We shall first consider the second part of section<\/p>\n
      2 as to whether the Act removes retrospectively the<\/p>\n
      right created by Act 1\/82 and Act 22\/88.\tFor that<\/p>\n
      purpose, we come back to the language of section 2 of<\/p>\n
      Act 34\/95.\n<\/p>\n
\n      In our view, what is removed by the Act 22\/95 is<\/p>\n
      the right created by the Government orders and not the<\/p>\n
      rights created by Act 1\/82 and Act 22\/88.\t If any<\/p>\n
      Government order had conferred any right to the<\/p>\n
      institutions  enumerated\tin  the Annexure to  GO\t 326
\ndated<\/p>\n
      17.10.89 read with GO 178 dated 23.7.90, it was only<\/p>\n
      those rights that were intended to be removed<\/p>\n
      retrospectively by section 2 from 17.10.89.  In other<\/p>\n
      words, the legislature while enacting section 2 of Act<\/p>\n
      34\/95 failed to remove the rights conferred by the<\/p>\n
      Principal Act 1\/82 and Act 22\/88 read with the<\/p>\n
      Committee’s  declaratory\tfindings.  Further, the\t Act
\n34\/95<\/span><\/p>\n
      being retrospective only from 17.10.89, it does not go<\/p>\n
      beyond that date into the back years.<\/p>\n
      So far as the first part of section 2 read with<\/p>\n
      section 46 of Act 1\/82, the State has also not placed<\/p>\n
      any  material  before  Court to sustain the  order  of
\ndenial<\/p>\n
      of arrears for want of funds.  What budgetary<\/p>\n
      allocations  were\t made  in the concerned\t years\twere
\nnever<\/p>\n
      placed before Court.  There is also no proof of any<\/p>\n
      inquiry as required by the first part of section 46(1)<\/p>\n
      of  Act 1\/82.  Thus, under the first and second  parts
\nof<\/p>\n
      section 2 of Act 34\/95, there is no removal of the<\/p>\n
      statutory\t right\tcreated by Act I\/82 and\t Act  22\/88,
\nread<\/p>\n
      with the recommendations of the Committee.  Point 1 is<\/p>\n
      decided accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
\n      Point 2:\n<\/p>\n
      Act 22\/95 cannot set aside the judgment of the learned
\nSingle Judge<\/p>\n
      Now section 2 of the Act 34\/95 also purports to<\/p>\n
      nullify  the  effect  of the judgment of\tthe  learned
\nSingle<\/p>\n
      Judge.  It is well settled that the legislature cannot<\/p>\n
      overrule a judgment by passing a law to that effect<\/p>\n
      unless it removes the basis of the legal rights upon<\/p>\n
      which the judgment is based, with retrospective effect<\/p>\n
      and   provided   there   is  no\tviolation   of\t any
\nconstitutional<\/p>\n
      provision\t   in\t such\t  withdrawal\tof    rights
\nretrospectively.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      In the present case, we are not going into the<\/p>\n
      question whether any provision of the Constitution is<\/p>\n
      violated while passing Act 34\/95 denying arrears of<\/p>\n
      grant-in-aid retrospectively.  However, in our view,<\/p>\n
      inasmuch\tas  the rights created by Act 1\/82  and\t Act
\n22\/88<\/span><\/p>\n
      read  with  the Committee’s recommendations  have\t not
\nbeen<\/p>\n
      nullified by Act 22\/95, the judgment of the learned<\/p>\n
      Single Judge remains effective.  The basis of the<\/p>\n
      judgment has not been removed.  We have already shown<\/p>\n
      that  the\t rights\t flowing  from\tthe  Acts  were\t not
\ntouched.\n<\/p>\n
      Only rights flowing from Government orders were taken<\/p>\n
      away retrospectively.  It is therefore necessary to<\/p>\n
      give effect to the judgment of the learned Single<\/p>\n
      Judge.  The writ appeal was rightly dismissed.<\/p>\n
      For the above reasons, which are somewhat<\/p>\n
      different\t from  the  reasons given  by  the  Division
\nBench,<\/p>\n
      we  dismiss  this\t Civil Appeal.\tThe arrears  of\t the
\ngrant-\n<\/p>\n
      in-aid as declared above as per Act I\/82 and Act 22\/88<\/p>\n
      and also as directed by the learned Single Judge shall<\/p>\n
      now  be  released\t in favour of the  writ\t petitioner.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
There<\/p>\n
      will be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
      ……………..J.  [M.JAGANNADHA RAO]<\/p>\n
      NEW  DELHI;   ……………..J.\t   August  7,  2000.
\n[K.G.BALAKRISHNAN]<\/p>\n
      IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA<\/p>\n
      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION<\/p>\n
      CIVIL APPEAL NO.\t2422 OF 1997<\/p>\n
      Govt.  of Andhra Pradesh & Others ..Appellants<\/p>\n
      Versus<\/p>\n
      G.V.K.Girls High School ..Respondent<\/p>\n
      —-\n<\/p>\n
\n      Dear Brother Sri Balakrishnan,<\/p>\n
      Draft Judgment in the above-mentioned matter is<\/p>\n
      sent herewith for your kind consideration please.<\/p>\n
      With regards,<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000 Author: M J Rao Bench: M.J.Rao K.G Balakrishnana CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2422 of 1997 PETITIONER: GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS Vs. RESPONDENT: G.V.K. GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08\/08\/2000 BENCH: M.J.Rao K.G Balakrishnana […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-93547","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nGovt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2000-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-21T23:56:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"23 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000\",\"datePublished\":\"2000-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-21T23:56:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000\"},\"wordCount\":4571,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000\",\"name\":\"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2000-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-21T23:56:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2000-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-21T23:56:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"23 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000","datePublished":"2000-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-21T23:56:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000"},"wordCount":4571,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000","name":"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2000-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-21T23:56:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govt-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-vs-g-v-k-girls-high-school-on-7-august-2000#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors vs G.V.K. Girls High School on 7 August, 2000"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93547","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=93547"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93547\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=93547"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=93547"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=93547"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}