The High Courts in India have the power to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus to compel the performance in a proper and lawful manner of the discretion conferred upon the Government or a public authority.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard Sri. D.R. Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel for Sri. Saravana S., appearing for the petitioner; Smt. A.R. Sharadamba, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3; and Sri. M.R. Shylendra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4.

2. In this petition, the petitioner-School has challenged the order dtd. 21/10/2022 passed by the respondent No.1 (Annexure-G) and also sought for writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to grant permission to commence classes for IX and X Standards in the petitionerSchool for the Academic year 2021-2022 in terms of the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.4594 of 2022 decided on 15/9/2022 (Annexure-F).

3. The careful examination of the writ papers would indicate that the petitioner-School has already approached this Court in respect of the very same relief in Writ Petition No.185 of 2022 and this Court, by order dtd. 7/1/2022, directed the respondent No.1 to consider the grievance of the petitioner-School. Pursuant to same, the respondentAuthorities have issued endorsement dtd. 17/2/2022. The said endorsement was challenged by the petitionerSchool in Writ Petition No.4594 of 2022. This Court, by order dtd. 15/9/2022, allowed the petition and as such, the endorsement dtd. 17/2/2022 impugned therein was quashed and thereby, this Court has directed the respondent-Authorities to reconsider the grievance of the petitioner-School at the earliest, in any event within a period of two weeks i.e., on or before 19/9/2022. Thereafter, the respondent-Authorities, pursuant to order passed by this Court, has issued endorsement dtd. 21/10/2022 (Annexure-G), directing the petitioner-School to get 'No Objection Certificate' from the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Kolar District.

4. Learned Senior Counsel Sri. D.R. Ravishankar, appearing for the petitioner-School, has made available the copy of the letter dtd. 8/11/2022 addressed to the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, requesting for issuance of the fitness certificate of building. However, that was endorsed by the Executive Engineer that he would get report from the Assistant Executive Engineer, Bangarpet SubDivision.

5. On careful examination of the writ papers and taking into consideration the arguments advanced by the learned Additional Government Advocate, despite this Court having directed the learned Additional Government Advocate to get instructions in the matter, however, petitioner-School was directed to get 'No Objection Certificate' from the Executive Engineer in terms of the endorsement dtd. 21/10/2022, is not correct. Accordingly, I am of the view that the writ petition deserves to be allowed by setting aside the endorsement dtd. 21/10/2022. Despite the petitionerSchool having approached this Court on earlier two occasions, and inspite of the direction of this Court, respondentAuthorities have not taken note of the grievance of the petitioner-School nor the observation made by this Court in Writ Petition No.4594 of 2022. At this juncture, it is relevant to deduce the law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA vs. K.S. JAGANNATHAN reported in (1986)2 SCC 679. The relevant paragraphs are 18 to 20, which reads thus:

"18. The first contention urged by learned Counsel for the Appellants was that the Division Bench of the High Court could not issue a writ of mandamus to direct a public authority to exercise its discretion in a particular manner. There is a basic fallacy underlying this submission both with respect to the order of the Division Bench and the purpose and scope of the writ of mandamus. The High Court had not issued a writ of mandamus. A writ of mandamus. Was the relief prayed for by the Respondents in their writ petition. What the Division Bench did was to issue directions to the Appellants in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Under Article 226 of the