B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J. ( 1 ) THESE writ petitions may be disposed of by a common order since the issues and the subject matter that arise for consideration are one and the same. The submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners challenging the impugned action are similar. ( 2 ) THE petitioners are the publishers. They publish various kinds of books including the textbooks prescribed by the board of Intermediate Education for intermediate course. They are aggrieved by the action of the Board of Intermediate education in not prescribing the entries/ textbooks pursuant to its own notification dated 21-12-2000. The petitioners accordingly pray for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith prescribe the textbooks based on the recommendations of the Subject Committee of the Board and place the orders for publication of selected books. ( 3 ) BEFORE adverting to the question as to whether the petitioners are entitled for any relief in these writ petitions, it may be necessary to briefly notice the relevant facts leading to filing of these writ petitions. ( 4 ) THE Board of Intermediate Education in its meeting held on 14-3-2000 took a decision to revise the syllabi for intermediate first year course and accordingly constituted Subject Committee for five languages, that is to say, English, telugu, Sanskrit, Hindi and Urdu. In accordance with the recommendations of the Subject Committee, the Board issued a notification dated 21-12-2000 inviting entries from authors/publishers for consideration for prescription of textbooks as per the revised syllabi in five language subjects of study for the first year intermediate course for the academic year 2001-2002. All the petitioners herein who are the publishers submitted entries with reference to the notification. ( 5 ) IT is the case of the petitioners that the entries are required to be referred to the subject Committee consisting of experts in the concerned subjects and based on the recommendations of the Subject committee; textbooks have to be prescribed for the first year intermediate course for the academic year 2001-2002. It is contended that the only competent authority for evaluation of entries is the Subject committee as per the rules and the recommendations of the Subject Committee alone would constitute the basis for prescribing the syllabi. It is contended that the only competent authority for evaluation of entries is the Subject committee as per the rules and the recommendations of the Subject Committee alone would constitute the basis for prescribing the syllabi. ( 6 ) IT is the case of the petitioners that the entries submitted by the petitioners were referred to the Subject Committee for evaluation and their enquiries revealed that the recommendations have already been finalised and formality of decision remained to be taken for prescription of textbooks. ( 7 ) THE petitioners contend that the Board at the interest of some vested interests and on a false representation made by such vested interests complaining of some irregularities in the matter of selection of books kept the matter under cold storage. There is no option left to the Board except to follow the recommendations of the Subject committee and accordingly finalise the entries submitted by various publishers. The inaction on the part of the respondents in prescribing the entries/textbooks pursuant to the notification dated 21-12-2000 is challenged. ( 8 ) THE record would disclose that the entries received from various publishers and authors were examined by the Review committee constituted by the Standing committee on academic affairs. The entries recommended by the Review Committee were placed before the Subject Committee on 3-5-2001. The Subject Committee also appears to have made its recommendations. It is not necessary to go into the details of the recommendations of the Subject committee. ( 9 ) WHILE the matter stood thus, the government received a representation/ complaint from responsible quarters alleging certain irregularities regarding selection of textbooks for the first year intermediate course and in proposing to give printing rights to certain private publishers in respect of the said textbooks. The State Government set the law in motion and proposed to make an enquiry into the matter and accordingly as a preliminary step called for a detailed report from the board of Intermediate Education. The board submitted its report dated 23-5-2001 to the Government and the Government having received the said report has decided to instruct the Board to take second opinion from another set of reviewers and place the same before the Subject Committee concerned. The State Government accordingly by its letter dated 18-6-2001 directed the Board of Intermediate education to obtain second opinion from another set of reviewers and place their views before the Subject Committee concerned. The State Government accordingly by its letter dated 18-6-2001 directed the Board of Intermediate education to obtain second opinion from another set of reviewers and place their views before the Subject Committee concerned. The State Government as an interim measure directed the Board of intermediate Education to continue the existing syllabi and textbooks for the intermediate course for the academic year 2001-2002. ( 10 ) THE record would undoubtedly reveal that the Subject Committee had approved the entries and a decision is taken to revise the syllabi. But, it is not clear as to whether the recommendations were placed before the Standing Committee on academic affairs. The rules framed under the A. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1971 (for short the Act ) confer power to formulate, modify or revise the syllabus; to recommend to the Chairman, Standing committee on academic affairs different panels of names for appointment as editors, reviewers and writers for language and non-language subject books and to recommend to the Chairman, Standing committee on academic affairs, the Text books to be prescribed or reference books to be commended for Intermediate courses of study; etc. , upon the Subject Committee constituted for the purpose. The Subject committee itself is required to be constituted in accordance with Rule 5 of the rules. The Standing Committee on academic affairs appointed by the Board on the recommendations of the Chairman of the Board is conferred with the power "to deal with all academic matters. " (Emphasis is of mine), subject to the provisions of the act and Regulations. Exclusive jurisdiction is conferred upon the Standing Committee on academic affairs to consider and accept the recommendations of the Subject committee regarding: (A) Syllabus and curriculum, ( 11 ) THEREFORE, whatever may have been done by the Review Committee and the subject Committee are only recommendatory in nature. The matter is required to be dealt with by the Standing committee on academic affairs and it has to make its own recommendations to the board after considering the recommendations of the Subject Committee regarding syllabus and curriculum. ( 12 ) IT appears that before the matter reached that stage, the Government intervened in the matter on receiving a detailed complaint from a very responsible quarter. The record would disclose that the government proposed to make an enquiry into the matter and accordingly called for a detailed report through the D. O. letter dated 15-5-2001. ( 12 ) IT appears that before the matter reached that stage, the Government intervened in the matter on receiving a detailed complaint from a very responsible quarter. The record would disclose that the government proposed to make an enquiry into the matter and accordingly called for a detailed report through the D. O. letter dated 15-5-2001. The Government is seized of the matter. The Government accordingly directed the Board of Intermediate education not to take any further action in connection with giving the printing work to the private publishers until further orders from the Government. The Government through its letter dated 18-6-2001 directed the Board of Intermediate Education to continue the existing syllabus and textbooks for intermediate education for the year 2001-2002. The Government "having examined "the issue of printing of textbooks of intermediate education" and having considered the same directed the board to take opinion from another set of reviewers for placing the same before the subject Committee concerned "in order to restore the credibility in the selection process". The Government, prima facie, appears to have reached the conclusion that the Board of Intermediate lost its credibility in the selection process in the matter of selecting the entries and printing of textbooks. ( 13 ) IT is under those circumstances, the whole proposal of inviting entries is given goby and consequently the Board has taken a decision pursuant to the directions of the government to continue the existing syllabus and textbooks. ( 14 ) IN my considered opinion and as rightly argued by the learned Government pleader for Higher Education the petitioners herein who are the publishers of books have no right to insist that their entries should be accepted by the Board merely because the Subject Committee had taken a decision in this regard accepting some of the entries offered by the petitioners. The record made available for the perusal of the Court itself would disclose that there is any amount of controversy with regard to the decision of the reviewers or the Subject Committee. The decision of the Subject Committee is not final. The same is required to be approved by the Standing Committee on academic affairs. ( 15 ) IN the circumstances, a Writ of mandamus as such does not lie compelling the respondents to accept the entries offered by the petitioners. No legal right much less any fundamental right of the petitioners is infringed. The same is required to be approved by the Standing Committee on academic affairs. ( 15 ) IN the circumstances, a Writ of mandamus as such does not lie compelling the respondents to accept the entries offered by the petitioners. No legal right much less any fundamental right of the petitioners is infringed. Even if the entries offered by the publishers are accepted by the Board of intermediate Education, it does not confer any automatic right to get those accepted entries to be published and printed through the very same publishers who offered the entries. The petitioners cannot insist that the respondents should be compelled to enter into a transaction with them for getting the entries published and printed through them. Acceptance of entries offered by the petitioners itself would not confer any automatic right upon the petitioners to get their entries published through them. ( 16 ) IN none of these writ petitions, the petitioners challenge the power of the government to issue such directions as the one issued directing the Board of intermediate Education to continue the existing syllabus and also for taking second opinion from another set of reviewers in order to restore the credibility in the selection process. ( 17 ) HOWEVER, Sri E. Manohar, learned senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in W. P. No. 12025 of 2001 contended that the power exercised by the government in the instant case does not satisfy the requirement of Section 15 of the act. It is contended that the power conferred upon the Government under subsection (4) of Section 15 of the Act is required to be exercised sparingly and only on being satisfied that the circumstances exist which render it necessary for the government to take immediate action. It is contended that such order, if any, to be passed and action to be taken is required to be consistent with the purpose of the Act. ( 18 ) A bare reading of Section 15 of the act as a whole would make it abundantly clear that a very wide power is conferred upon the Government to cause an inspection into the affairs of the Board and cause an enquiry to be made in respect of i any matter connected with the Board. ( 18 ) A bare reading of Section 15 of the act as a whole would make it abundantly clear that a very wide power is conferred upon the Government to cause an inspection into the affairs of the Board and cause an enquiry to be made in respect of i any matter connected with the Board. Of course, the Government is required to issue a notice to the Board of its intention to cause such inspection or enquiry to be made and the Board shall be entitled to be represented thereat. The action required to be taken after receiving the report of the inspection and the manner thereof, is prescribed by sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 15 of the act. The Government is entitled to cause an enquiry in respect of any matter connected with the Board. Prescription of syllabus and calling for entries in that regard cannot be said to be not a matter connected with the board. Sub-section (4) of Section 15 of the act confers power upon the Government to take such action as may appear to the government to be necessary if the circumstances so exist making it necessary for the Government to take immediate action. ( 19 ) THE Government in the instant case having received the representations from the responsible quarters thought it fit to set the law in motion and cause an enquiry with regard to the decision of the Board of intermediate Education for consideration of prescription of textbooks for the first year intermediate course for the academic year 2001-2002. Prescription of textbooks cannot be said to be not a matter connected with the Board. ( 20 ) IN the circumstances, the directions issued by the Government cannot be held to be ultra vires Section 15 of the Act. The action on the part of the Government is a bona fide one. Variety of factors and material available on record has been evidently taken into consideration by the Government for setting the law in motion in exercise of power conferred under Section 15 of the act. ( 21 ) IT is needless to observe that the order passed by the Government is not in the nature of any direction in any individual or particular case as such. The proposed enquiry by the Government is with reference to the matter connected with the Board. ( 21 ) IT is needless to observe that the order passed by the Government is not in the nature of any direction in any individual or particular case as such. The proposed enquiry by the Government is with reference to the matter connected with the Board. ( 22 ) HOWEVER, the record made available for the perusal of the Court would reveal certain disturbing trends. Many of the publishers appear to have made serious inroads into the portals of the Board of intermediate Education as well as the government. Undoubtedly, it is a matter for further enquiry by the Government in exercise of its power under Section 15 of the act. The Government, in the circumstances, shall proceed with the further enquiry into the matter in exercise of its power under section 15 of the Act and issue such further appropriate directions as it may consider necessary and the Board shall comply with such directions. ( 23 ) THE learned Senior Counsel placed reliance upon a press statement purported to have been issued by the Honourable minister for Higher Education stating that there were no irregularities whatsoever in the matter of selection and acceptance of entries offered by the publishers. No opinion need be expressed as to how and under what circumstances such a statement has been issued by the Honourable minister, since the Government itself thought it fit to interfere and make an enquiry into the matter. It is needless to note that the Honourable Minister happens to be the Chairman of the Board and may be if any such statement had been issued, the same may have been issued on behalf of the board. ( 24 ) FOR all the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit whatsoever in these writ petitions. The Government shall, however, continue with its enquiry and probe into the issues raised from the responsible quarters and accordingly issue suitable directions. ( 25 ) THE writ petitions are accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.