A Legislature cannot enact a law which simply declares earlier judicial decisions as invalid or not binding, as such power would be a judicial power which cannot be encroached upon by the legislature under the Constitution.

( 1 ) THE Government of the State has invoked Clause 15 of the Letters Patent of the Court and preferred the instant appeal against the Judgment in W. P. No. 15879 of 1990 holding, inter alia, that the petitioner-respondent is entitled to the arrears of Grant-in-Aid and in its case, the Government Order in G. O. Ms. No. 138 cannot be given effect to. The above Government Order has been issued in the circumstances which are disclosed by the following facts: by G. O. Ms. No. 347 dated 1-8-1986, the petitioner-respondent-school was admitted to Grant-in-Aid with effect from 1-9-1985 and an amount of rs. 98,400/- with effect from 1-9-1985 to 28-2-1986 was released by the appellant herein as Grant-in-Aid. The Grant, however, was stopped and as there were complaints of misuse of thegrant-in- Aid, the appellant appointed a High Level committee by G. O. Rt. No. 220 dated 24-2-1988 to go into the irregularities committed by various institutions and misuse of the Grant-in-Aid by them. Before, however, the Committee could inquire and submit its report, Andhra pradesh Private Educational Institutions Grant-in-Aid (Regulation) Act, 1988 was brought into effect on 28-8-1988 and the Committee appointed in G. O. Rt. No. 220 dated 24-2-1988 was given statutory recognition. The Committee submitted its recommendations and the Government, pursuant to the Report of the Committee, issued G. O. Ms. No. 326 dated 17-10-1989 admitting Grant-in- aid to various institutions mentioned in the Annexure appended to the government Order. While admitting these institutions to Grant-in Aid, the government in paragraph 8 of its order stated: "regarding payment of arrears to the schools now admitted to Grant-in-Aid, orders will be issued separately. The Government then issued G. O. Ms. No. 138 dated 25-4-1994 conveying its decision that no arrears would be paid to the educational institutions which were admitted to Grant-in-Aid with effect from 1-11-1989 vide G. O. Ms. No. 326 dated 17-10-1989. Aggrieved by the said Government Order, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The main stand, however, opposing the writ petition on behalf of the appellants has been that the petitioner-respondent has no right for the Grant-in-Aid. Various provisions of the Act are referred to and it is contended that since, as a consequence of the enquiry, the petitioner-respondent-institution was found fit for grant of Grant-in-Aid and the Government acknowledged the recommendation in G. O. Ms. No. 326 dated 17-10-1989, the aid, if any, would be payable from the said date only. Learned single Judge has gone into various provisions of the Act as well as the contents of various Government Orders issued from time to time and has taken notice of G. O. Ms. No. 138 dated 25-4-1994 in particular in which it is stated that it was on account of the present financial position of the State Government that decision was taken not to pay the arrears. He has, for the reasons as follows, found in favour of the petitioner-respondent-"an educational institution has no right to demand that the Government should admit the institution to grant-in-aid; it is within the discretion of the Government to admit an institution to grant-in-aid provided, the institution fulfils the conditions laid down in the Education Act of 1982. Once the Government exercises its discretion and admits an institution to grant-in-aid on the ground that it has fulfilled the conditions laid down under the Education Act of 1982 the right gets crystalised into a statutory right enforceable in a court of law. However, the said right is subject to the power of the Government to cancel if any one of the conditions, subject to which the institution was admitted to grant-in-aid, is violated. This power is exercised by the Government by appointing the High Level Committee, under G. O. Rtno. 220 on receipt of complaints that various institutions which were admitted to grant-in-aid violated and misused the grant-in-aid. The Committee

Click Here to Read the rest of this document