ORDER : The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus declaring the proceedings in RC.No.2140/Admn.IV-2/2006 dated 12.01.2007 to the extent of directing the petitioner’s college not to utilize the funds received by the petitioner’s college as null and void and set aside the same in the interest of justice. 2. The petitioner’s case is thus: (a) The 1st respondent in his letter in RC.No.2140/Admn.114-2/2006 dated 12.01.2007 issued proceedings under Rule 7 of the A.P. Grant in Aid Code r/w Section 24 of the A.P. Education Act, 1982 and pleased to approve the change of correspondence ship of Sri Sarvodaya College, Nellore. While approving the change of correspondence ship, the 1st respondent put a rider that the amounts payable in general account and special fee account (accumulations) shall not be drawn without prior and specific approval of the director of Collegiate Education-1st respondent. For issuing such rider no specific reason is assigned nor any supporting provision of law was mentioned. Therefore, the petitioner challenges the impugned proceedings dated 12.01.2007 to the extent of the direction mentioned therein. (b) The correspondent of the petitioner’s college has made many representations. Despite receiving the same, the 1st respondent did not give any reply. Due to the inaction of the 1st respondent, the petitioner’s college is suffering a lot of inconvenience and financial crisis. The petitioner’s college is running aided courses in B.Com. (Computer Applications) and B.Sc. (Computer Science) and also engaging lectures in the said courses for which it has to incur expenditure from the general fee account and the college is not in a position to pay salaries and run the existing courses. In those circumstances, as stated supra, the petitioner made several representations to the respondent authorities, but there is no reply. Further, the University Grants Commission (UGC) had issued notice to the petitioner on 27.01.2013 wherein it was mentioned that the institutions which are receiving funds from the UGC must apply to the Accreditation agency at the earliest or else the UGC may discontinue the financial assistance to such institution. Further, the University Grants Commission (UGC) had issued notice to the petitioner on 27.01.2013 wherein it was mentioned that the institutions which are receiving funds from the UGC must apply to the Accreditation agency at the earliest or else the UGC may discontinue the financial assistance to such institution. It was specifically stated that the petitioner’s college was not recognized under NACC on account of lack of funds and the letters issued by the present correspondent on 18.12.2012 and 22.04.2013 specifically canvassed to the 1st respondent that on account of non-operation of the general account and special fee funds by virtue of the proceedings dated 12.01.2007 of 1st respondent, the college is unable to meet the basic needs of the college and also to meet the requirements of the UGC guidelines. In that view, the petitioner made several representations to 1st respondent. For the reasons best known, the 1st respondent is not allowing to operate account as per the impugned letter dated 12.01.2007. Hence, the writ petition. 3. The respondents filed counter and opposed the writ petition contending thus: (a) It is a fact that while approving the correspondent ship in favour of Sri N.Yanadi Shetty, instructions have been issued not to utilize funds available in General Account and Special Fee Accumulations of the college without prior permission of the Commissioner of Collegiate Education vide proceedings in Rc.No.2140/Admin-IV-2/2-6 dated 12.01.2007. The said instructions were issued for the reason that during the year 1995 certain disputes were raised among the Management regarding correspondent ship. Therefore, the Commissioner of Collegiate Education has issued orders placing the Executive Officer of Endowments Department as correspondent of the college in view of the disputes among the management from the year 1995. The reasons for giving such instructions are that earlier there were instances where they have withdrawn the General fee / Special fee amounts without prior permission of the Commissioner of Collegiate Education and it was difficult to initiate action against the defaulting correspondents as they were under direct control of the Endowments Department. (b) It is further stated that as per the rules the accumulated special fee amount has to be deposited in any nationalized bank in the shape of fixed deposit and for utilization of interest on Corpus fund. (b) It is further stated that as per the rules the accumulated special fee amount has to be deposited in any nationalized bank in the shape of fixed deposit and for utilization of interest on Corpus fund. As per Rule 4 of the G.O.Ms.No.29, Education dated 05.02.1987, the educational agency of the private institution shall deposit the corpus fund (endowment) in the joint account of the management and the Government represented by the Regional Joint Director of the Collegiate Education concerned, in any of the branches of the nationalized banks. Under no circumstances the corpus fund deposited shall be permitted to be withdrawn. The Government may however permit the educational agency to utilize the interest accrued over and above the prescribed corpus fund for the development of the institution at any interval of five to ten years. (c) As far as utilization of the accumulated aided tuition fee account, it is submitted that the management has to collect the tuition fee at Rs.1000/- per year as per the rates prescribed by the Government from the students of the aided sections. After meeting the expenditure on contingent items, the remaining accumulated balance of the tuition fee on aided sections may be left over to the management for utilization to the developmental activities of the college with prior permission of the Commissioner of Collegiate Education. (d) Further, it is submitted that as per Para 8 of the Special fee adhoc rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.593, Education Department, dated 21.03.1972, the special fee collected will be utilized for specific purpose for which the fee is collected. Further, the special fee collected in a year may be as far as possible, be fully utilized during the year in which it is collected. If any amount is left over in the special fee, such amount would be transferred to the corpus fund or spent on development activities in the cases of Aided colleges with the permission of the Commissioner. (e) Since the former Correspondent of the college has withdrawn the amounts from the aided General Fee accounts without permission of the Commissioner of Collegiate Education towards the construction of the PG Building (unaided) sections, by diverting the funds, though instructions have been issued to the Correspondent of the college to seek prior permission of the Commissioner at the time of withdrawing the amounts. (f) It is submitted that the petitioner has submitted the proposals on different dates. He stated that general fee fund is usually operated to meet the basic needs of the college such as payment of affiliation fee, electricity bills, telephone bills, sanitation bills etc. and an amount of Rs.10.50 lakh was transferred by the then Correspondent from the general fee account (aided) for construction of PG building without prior permission of the Commissioner of Collegiate Education. The Governing body of the college which met on 26.10.2004 resolved to utilize Rs.12.00 lakhs for construction of PG building as per the norms of the APSCHE, Hyderabad and the building was constructed and from 2006 onwards it was proposed to remit back every year Rs.1.00 lakh to the college general fee funds from the College PG office. As such he has requested the Commissioner of Collegiate Education to accord permission for operation of the general fee accounts and special fee accounts in order to run the college in a befitting manner. (g) While the matter stood thus, a complaint was received on 16.02.2007 from the teaching and non-teaching staff of the college stating that Dr. T.Vasantha Kumar, Lecturer in Statistics has taken as incharge principal of the college and among other allegations they alleged that he has withdrawn Rs.30,000/- from the Special fee funds for his personal needs but not for the students or college welfare. This is much against the instructions or the orders of the Commissioner of Collegiate Education dated 12.01.2007. Therefore, the Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Guntur has been requested to conduct an enquiry and to submit his report in the matter on 28.05.2007. (h) It is submitted that through his letter dated 20.03.2017 he requested that the College has to get NAAC Accreditation Certificate and to that extent notification is also issued fixing deadline as 31.03.2017 for submission of Letter of Intent. The petitioner requested for grant of permission to meet the preliminary expenditure relating to the process of granting of NAAC Accreditation from Special Fee Accumulated funds to the tune of Rs.2,21,176.80 ps from the Special Fee Account of the college upto 2016-17. The petitioner requested for grant of permission to meet the preliminary expenditure relating to the process of granting of NAAC Accreditation from Special Fee Accumulated funds to the tune of Rs.2,21,176.80 ps from the Special Fee Account of the college upto 2016-17. Basing on the request of the petitioner, the Commissioner of Collegiate Education vide proceedings dated 12.05.2017 accorded permission to utilize the amount of Rs.2,21,176.80 ps from the Special fee funds to meet the preliminary expenditure relating to the process for getting NAAC Accreditation, subject to condition that by following due procedure as per the existing rules and also production of vouchers etc. at the time of audit. (i) It is submitted that the Government recently has taken a policy decision of absorption of Aided Teaching and Non-teaching staff working in Aided Degree Colleges to Government. Basing on the willingness given by the correspondent of the College, the Government in G.O.Rt.No.129, Higher Education (C.E.A2) Department, dated 01.09.2021, absorbed (4) Aided Teaching and (7) Non-teaching staff into Government. Thus, now the Sarvodaya Degree College, Nellore has become an Unaided Degree College. In these circumstances, the writ petition may be dismissed. 4. Heard arguments of Sri M.V.Raja Raam, learned counsel for petitioner, and learned Government Pleader for Higher Education representing the respondents. 5. Severely remonstrating the impugned proceedings dated 12.01.2017 issued by 1st respondent, learned counsel for petitioner Sri M.V.Raja Raam would submit that the respondent authorities have no power to issue any sanctions on the expenditure to be incurred by the petitioner institution in respect of the amounts covered by the General account and Special Fee account and the petitioner institution now become an unaided college and in that view, no sanctions can be imposed on the petitioner on its expenditure. While opposing the writ petition, learned Government Pleader admitted that the petitioner college has now become an unaided degree college. 6. As can be seen from the impugned proceedings dated 12.01.2007, while approving the change of correspondent ship of the petitioner’s college from Sri S.Poornachander Rao to Sri N.Yanadi Shetty, Executive Officer, Sri Mallikarjuna Swamy Kamakshhi Tayee Temple, Zonnawada, Nellore District, the 1st respondent, however, directed that the present correspondent shall not draw and spend any amounts available under the Head (1) General Account and (2) Special Fee Account (Accumulation) without prior and specific approval of the Director of Collegiate Education (1st respondent). As can be seen from the proceedings, no provision of law is mentioned which conferred the said power on the 1st respondent to impose sanctions. 7. Be that it may, as can be seen from the averments in the counter, perhaps in view of some mismanagement during the previous period, it appears, 1st respondent imposed such conditions. Be that it may, admittedly now the petitioner college became unaided college. In that view of the matter, the 1st respondent cannot impose any sanctions on the expenditure to be incurred by the petitioner in the course of administration of its college. 8. Considering these aspects, this Writ Petition is allowed and the proceedings in Rc.No.2140/Admn.IV-2/2006 dated 12.01.2007 issued by the 1st respondent are set aside to the extent of imposing condition that the correspondent of the 1st petitioner college shall not draw and spend any amounts from the General account and Special Fee account concerned. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending for consideration shall stand closed.