ORDER : K. SUJANA, J. This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:- “to issue a Writ Orders or Direction particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus: A) Declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.4 in issuing the proceedings in Rc.No.2448/B5/2024 Dt:19 05 2025 directing to vacate the buildings and further stated action will be initiated for the cancellation of permission and recognition without any further notice as well as not to take fresh admissions until issue is settled as being bad, arbitrary, illegal, mechanical and contrary to provision of The Education Act 1982 and A.P. Educational Institution Establishment Recognition Administration and Control of Schools under Private Management Rules, 1993 and Right to Education Act 2009 and; B) Consequentially set-aside the proceedings of Respondent No 4 in vide proceedings bearing Rc No.2448/B5/2024 Dt 19 05 2025 and; C) Pass such further order or orders as this Hon’ble Court maydeem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case…” 2. Heard Sri R. Anurag, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education for respondent Nos.1 to 5. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the General Secretary and authorized correspondent of Ambitus The School, established in 2024 under the name of Ikya Education Society. The school was granted recognition from Pre-Primary to Class VIII by the competent authorities for the academic years 2024–25 to 2033–34, after fulfilling all the required norms, including sanitation, structural soundness, fire safety, and traffic clearance certificates. The school has been operating smoothly, maintaining proper records, employing qualified teachers, and ensuring student welfare. However, the petitioner is aggrieved by the arbitrary and high-handed action of Respondent No.4, who issued proceedings dated 19.05.2025 directing the school to vacate the premises and not to take fresh admissions, threatening cancellation of recognition without giving any proper notice or opportunity of being heard. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the action of respondent No.4 is based on a report from respondent No.5 regarding alleged issues with the NOC and Occupancy Certificate. In response to the show-cause notice issued earlier on 07.10.2024, the petitioner had submitted all the relevant documents to the concerned authority on 02.11.2024. Despite this, the impugned order falsely claims non-submission of documents and proceeds mechanically without considering the reply or conducting any inquiry. In response to the show-cause notice issued earlier on 07.10.2024, the petitioner had submitted all the relevant documents to the concerned authority on 02.11.2024. Despite this, the impugned order falsely claims non-submission of documents and proceeds mechanically without considering the reply or conducting any inquiry. He contended that the recognition granted by respondent No.4 stands merged with the recognition granted by respondent No.3 for Class VIII for 10 years, thus taking the matter out of the jurisdiction of Respondent No.4. 5. He further contended that respondent No.4 is not the competent authority to cancel recognition of a secondary school, and even if it were, it has acted without jurisdiction, without notice, without proper enquiry, and in violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner submits that the rejection of the occupancy certificate by HMDA was responded to on 30.05.2025 with clarifications, and hence, the issue is still pending resolution and that penal actions like eviction and denial of admissions are unjustified, particularly when the recognition was granted after proper verification. Such actions threaten the future of students, the livelihood of staff, and the functioning of the school. Therefore, he prayed the Court to set aside the impugned proceedings dated 19.05.2025. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the Educational Authorities had identified certain lapses in the school building, which led to the issuance of a show cause notice dated 17.10.2024. However, upon receiving the notice, the petitioner failed to submit the required No Objection Certificate to the respondent authority. Therefore, there is no illegality in the issuance of the proceedings dated 17.10.2024. The counsel further submitted that, as per G.O.Ms.No.1, Education (PS) Department, dated 01.01.1994, the respondents have the authority to take action, including cancellation of recognition or permission in such circumstances. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the writ petition. 7. In light of the submissions made by both learned counsel and after perusing the material on record, it is noted that the petitioner claims to have already submitted the relevant documents to the municipal authority. However, the municipal authority has not been made a party to this writ petition. The petitioner also states that the municipal authority has forwarded these documents to the respondent authority. However, the municipal authority has not been made a party to this writ petition. The petitioner also states that the municipal authority has forwarded these documents to the respondent authority. In view of this, the petitioner is hereby directed to obtain the No Objection Certificate from the municipal authority and submit the same to the respondent authority without delay. The respondent authority is further directed to duly consider the submitted documents and representation made by the petitioner. Meanwhile, the petitioner is permitted to take fresh admissions, subject to the final disposal of the representation pending before the respondent authority. 8. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.