JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, J.: - Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioners assail the order dated 2-5-2012, whereby the opposite party No. 4 had withdrawn the recognition of the peti­tioners' institution on the ground that the entire land of the institution is not situ­ated at one place, on the basis of the re­port of the District Magistrate. 3. Petitioners' institution, namely, Patel Memorial Educational Society Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Taas Khera, Narpati, Hardoi applied for recognition and the Additional Secretary/opposite party No. 4 granted recognition under Section 7(4) of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, after due approval of the State Government for the Academic Session on Khasra No. 207, but subsequently the recognition granted to the Institution has been with­drawn on the ground that the building of the institution and the playground of the Insti­tution are not at one place and further more, the playground of the Institution is on plot/ Khasra No. 334/335, which is 180 meters from the building of the Institution con­structed on plot/Khasra No. 207. 4. According to petitioners, the same has been withdrawn in violation of the di­rections of the Government Order dated 10-9-2010, whereby certain guidelines were framed for grant of recognition and the necessary amendment was made in Chapter V Regulation 9(a)(5) of the Inter­mediate Education Act, 1921. Earlier, the criteria for land was 4000 square meters for the rural area and by amending provi­sion, it has been provided that the area of land for the purpose of recognition is re­quired 2000 square meters in which on 648 square meters be used for playground which will not be more than 200 meters from the school building. This fact has not been disputed in the counter-affidavit also. Even otherwise during pendency of the instant writ petition, the land between the building of the institution and playground has been purchased vide registered sale-deed dated 4-3-2013, a copy of the same is annexed as Annexure No. RA-2 to the rejoinder affi­davit. Though the petitioner preferred a rep­resentation stating all these facts, yet the same has not been considered. 5. In view of above, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 2-5-2012 is hereby quashed. Though the petitioner preferred a rep­resentation stating all these facts, yet the same has not been considered. 5. In view of above, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 2-5-2012 is hereby quashed. The opposite parties are directed to reconsider the mat­ter and pass appropriate orders, taking into consideration the provisions of the Govern­ment Order dated 10-9-2010 and the land, which has been purchased by means of registered sale-deed dated 4-3-2012 as stated here-in-above. Petition allowed.