JUDGMENT :

M.M.SUNDRESH, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 08.07.2019, wherein it has been held as under:

"3. On notice, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents has taken instructions from the respondents and reports that the authorities have inspected the petitioner's institute last week and the request of the petitioner for grant of recognition will be passed in accordance with law, without insisting for production of DTCP approval and in line with the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.20890 of 2016 dated 31.08.2016 which reads as below:

"15. In the result, the writ petitions are partly allowed and the impugned orders of the 1st respondent dated 30.04.2016 made in F.No.Southern/2016/1-28666650491-LOR and F.No.Southern/2016/1-2864028021-LOR respectively, are hereby set aside and the respondents are directed to conduct necessary inspection in the petitioner's college as to the availability of the infrastructural and other facilities for starting B.Pharm Degree Course by the petitioner's Trusts other than the recruitment of DTCP Approval; and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible so as to enable the petitioners to start academic session relating to the said course at least from the academic year 2017-2018. The petitioners have to pay necessary inspection and other fees to the respondents for the said purpose. However, in the circumstances for the case, there shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed."

4. The second respondent is directed to pass order on the application of the petitioner seeking temporary approval vide its proposal dated 25.10.2018 received by the second respondent office on 09.01.2019 within a period of three weeks from today.

5. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed."

2. The respondent/school admittedly started the institution without recognition. Noticing that a show-cause notice was issued on two grounds namely, (i) want of recognition and (ii) want of approval from the authorities under the Town and Country Planning Act. This show cause notice was challenged before this Court. By order dated 22.05.2019 in W.P.No.14647 of 2019 the learned Single Judge passed the following order:

"Mr.K.Karthikeyan, learned Government Advocate (Education) takes notice for the respondents. By consent of both the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. The core point that has to be considered is whether the show cause notice, which is challenged in the writ petition is to be set aside.

2. The impugned show cause notice dated 11.05.2019 has been issued by the respondents, calling upon the petitioner school to show cause as to why action should not be taken against the petitioner for running the school without obtaining necessary certificate of Recognition from the competent authority, as per the provisions of Section 18(1) of The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner would submit that the petitioner school had already submitted necessary proposal in the prescribed format coupled with supporting documents in the month of October 2018 to the competent authority and the same is also recommended by the Block Educational Officer to the District Educational Officer in Na.Ka.No.441/A2/2018 dated 26.10.2018. However, without passing any orders on the said proposal for recognition, the impugned show cause notice has been issued.

3. Taking into consideration the narrow compass and the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be a direction to the respondents to consider and pass orders on the proposal submitted by the writ petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and until such time, no coercive steps shall be taken by the respondents. W