HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

ORAL ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education.

2. The petitioner herein is the father of two children i.e., Master J. Yuvansh Jatoth, studying in 3^rd class with I.D. No.210IS1445 and Master J. Rudransh Jatoth, studying in 1^st class with I.D. No.210IS1444 in respondent No.4 School. There is dispute with regard to payment of school fee between the petitioner and respondent No.4. According to the petitioner, the school fee collected by respondent No.4 is exorbitant and is also in violation of the provisions of the Right to Education Act, 2009 and Telangana Education Act, 1980. Therefore, he has submitted a representation dated 23.07.2024 to respondent No.3 with a request to take action against respondent No.4. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said representation, respondent No.3 did not act upon the same.

3. On the other hand, respondent No.4 has stopped the children of the petitioner in attending the classes from 03.03.2025 onwards. The said action of respondent No.4 is illegal. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present writ petition to declare the action of respondent No.4, who is harassing the sons of the petitioner on the ground of non- payment of school fee as illegal and for a consequential direction to respondent No.3 to take appropriate and immediate steps to allow the children of the petitioner to attend classes regularly so that they may not lose the academic year.

4. Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education, on instructions, would submit that respondent No.3 has not received any representation from the petitioner, much less the representation dated 23.07.2024.

5. Though the petitioner is claiming that he has submitted representation dated 23.07.2024, he has not filed copy of the same. When this Court insisted learned counsel for the petitioner to produce copy of the same, he is not in a position to file the same except furnishing S.R. No.16220 of 2024, dated 23.07.2024. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education disputes the same.

6. Even according to the petitioner, respondent No.4 has stopped the children from attending the classes from 03.03.2025 onwards. Thereafter, he has not submitted any representation.

7. As discussed above, the petitioner is seeking to declare the action of respondent No.4 in preventing his children from attending classes as illegal. Respondent No.4 is a private entity. Therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable. The petitioner herein failed to make out any case to substantiate that respondent No.4 has violated any statutory duty to maintain the present writ petition.

8. It is apt to note that Section - 18 of the Telangana Education Act deals with ‘Government to provide facilities for imparting education’, while Section - 16 of the Right to Education Act deals with ‘examination and holding back in certain cases’, and the same are extracted hereunder:

“Section - 18. The Government may, for the purpose of implementing the provisions of this Act, provide adequate facilities for imparting general education, technical education, special education and teacher education in the State by,-

(a) establishing institutions; and maintaining educational (b) permitting any local authority or a private body of persons to establish educational institutions and maintain them according to such specifications as may be prescribed; and (c) taking, from time to time, such other steps as they may consider necessary or expedient.”

“16. Examination and holding back in certain cases.- (1) There shall be a regular examination in the fifth class and in the eighth class at the end of every academic year.

(2) If a child fails in the examination referred to in sub-section (1), he shall be given additional instruction and granted opportunity for re- examination within a period of two months from the date of declaration of the result.

(3) The appropriate Government may allow sc