S. B. MAJMUDAR, J.

( 1 ) WE have heard the learned advocates for the parties. We find that the points raised in these appeals are entirely different from the points raised in writ appeal No. 1510 of 1993. Therefore, we disconnected writ appeal No. 1510 of 1993 from this batch, and adjourned the said writ appeal for ten days. So far as these writ appeals are concerned, we are of the view that there is no case made out for interference.

( 2 ) THE appellants in these appeals wanted to start new primary teachers training institutes in the state. Therefore, they made applications for getting recognition. They submitted that they would not claim any grant from the state government and they will run the institutions on their own. The state authorities rejected this request on the ground that there was already a policy decision taken by the state not to permit starting of new training institutions as that would hurt number of unemployed trained personnel holding the teacher's training certificates, and therefore, during the currency of the eighth five year plan, no new training institutions should be recognised. The learned single judge, before whom these two writ petitions were argued, af

Click Here to Read the rest of this document