ORDER : NYAPATHY VIJAY, J. The present writ petition is filed questioning G.O.Rt.No.174, School Education (Exams) Department, dated 07.05.2025 and G.O.Rt.No.183, School Education (Exams) Department, dated 12.05.2025 issued by Respondent No.1 granting permission to Respondent Nos.3 and 4 to establish new Private Un-aided Junior Colleges at Dharmajigudem Village, Lingapalem Mandal, Eluru District from the academic year 2025-26. 2. The facts leading to filing of this case are as follows: The Petitioner is a registered Educational Society running two Junior Colleges namely Sri Prathibha Junior College from the academic year 2020-21 and had also taken over the Management of Sri Sai Junior College. The Colleges are located at Dharmajigudem Village, Lingapalem Mandal, Eluru District. While so, Respondent No.1 issued G.O.Rt.No.174, School Education (Exams) Department, dated 07.05.2025 and G.O.Rt.No.183, School Education (Exams) Department, dated 12.05.2025 granting permission to Respondent Nos.3 and 4 to establish a new Private Un-aided Junior Colleges namely Vanitha Junior College for Women and Ananya Junior College at Dharmajigudem Village, Lingapalem Mandal, Eluru District. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. 3. It is pleaded that the G.O.s were issued in relaxation of viability of the area rule under G.O.M.S.No.114, Higher Education (CE-III) Department, dated 09.08.2000 r/w G.O.M.S.No.47, Higher Education (IE-II), Department, dated 26.04.2006 without any justifiable reasons. It is stated that Respondent No.1 had issued G.O.Ms.No.496, School Education (Exams), Department, dated 04.12.2024, wherein viability to start a new Private Junior College have been identified across the State in 37 Mandals and in 2 Municipal areas with a viability to establish 47 colleges and 6 colleges respectively. It is stated that Lingapalem Mandal was not mentioned as a place where there is viability to start a new Junior College. It was stated that Dhamajigudem is a small rural village which already has five Junior Colleges which can admit 352 students each and the said colleges cater to the educational needs of the locality and therefore, there is no reason for establishing new colleges. 4. In the counter affidavit filed by Respondent No.1, it is stated that Sri Sai Junior College is being run by Baba Educational Society and not Petitioner as claimed. It was stated that Baba Educational Society had submitted proposals for shifting within Dharmajigudem Village, Lingapalem Mandal and the Government did not accord permission and proposals were returned. 5. 4. In the counter affidavit filed by Respondent No.1, it is stated that Sri Sai Junior College is being run by Baba Educational Society and not Petitioner as claimed. It was stated that Baba Educational Society had submitted proposals for shifting within Dharmajigudem Village, Lingapalem Mandal and the Government did not accord permission and proposals were returned. 5. It is stated that Respondent Nos.3 and 4 submitted proposals to Respondent No.2 to start a new Private Un-aided Junior College in Dharmajigudem Village from the academic year 2025-26 onwards. On receipt of the application, Respondent No.2 had directed RIO, Eluru District to carry out inspection of the proposed college and furnish a detailed report with specific recommendations for taking further action. The comprehensive inspection report along with relevant documents were submitted by Respondent No.2 to Respondent No.1 for taking further action. 6. It is stated that as per the SSC data furnished by the Deputy Educational Officer for the previous 04 academic years i.e 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 and admissions in intermediate colleges in the area for corresponding years, there is a viability for 04 Junior Colleges and the procedure is not deviated. But again at paragraph 12, it was stated that though there is no viability, in the light of the educational trends and the increased demand for quality education, the Government has power to consider establishment of new colleges with requisite criteria based on the recommendation of Board of Intermediate Education by relaxing the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.114, dated 09.08.2000. It was stated that new colleges solely on the number of students within specific Mandal is not entirely reflective of present day educational dynamics and students travels beyond their Mandal and across the District in search of better educational opportunities. Taking these factors, the Government is justified in establishing new junior colleges in relaxation of viability. 7. In the counter affidavit filed by Respondent Nos.3 and 4, objections were raised with regard to locus of Petitioner to prevent another educational institution on an apprehension of commercial injury. It was stated that the impugned G.Os were issued taking into consideration the larger public interest in improving educational infrastructure. It was also stated that there are more than 500 hundred students seeking admission and limiting the number of institutions would curtail access to better education. 8. It was stated that the impugned G.Os were issued taking into consideration the larger public interest in improving educational infrastructure. It was also stated that there are more than 500 hundred students seeking admission and limiting the number of institutions would curtail access to better education. 8. An additional counter affidavit was filed regarding poor infrastructure of Sri Sai Junior College, which was being run under ACC sheds at Dr.No.8/66, Dharmajigudem contrary to the permission, where it got, i.e. at R.S.No.619-1 and 619-2, Dr.No.16/17 of Dharmmajigudem. It was also stated that there is no registered lease deed in favour of Petitioner to run college there as the land owner had executed registered lease deed in favour of the Respondent No.3 for the said premises. A show cause notice was also issued to the Sri Sai Junior College on 24.9.2025 wherein several defects were raised apart from running college in wrong address. Similar notice was issued to Prathibha Junior College pointing out defects in infrastructure and enquiry is pending. 9. It is stated that the Petitioner’s college i.e. Pratibha Junior College and Sri Sai Junior College has admitted only 62 to 64 students which includes BIPC, MPC and CEC and the Colleges are not giving good infrastructure and that there is a short fall of requisite infrastructure and faculty. It is stated that the College working under Respondent No.3 has best faculty and infrastructure and therefore, the viability rule was relaxed for establishing new colleges. As regards SSC students passed out for Lingapalem Mandal, it is stated that the Colleges of Respondent No.3 are accessible to neighbouring Mandals i.e. Pedavegi Mandal, Musunuru Mandal, Chinthalapudi Mandal and Kamavarapukota Mandal and the same can be factored for establishing new colleges. 10. Heard Sri Kambhampati Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for the Petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Cooperation, K.V.Raghuveer and T.Sai surya, learned counsel for the Respondents. 11. The procedure for establishment of educational institutions is prescribed under Section 20 of the A.P. Education Act. As per the said provision, the competent authority, from time to time conduct survey to identify the educational needs of the locality and notify the same in the prescribed manner and call for applications from the Educational Agencies desirous of establishing the Educational Institutions. As per the said provision, the competent authority, from time to time conduct survey to identify the educational needs of the locality and notify the same in the prescribed manner and call for applications from the Educational Agencies desirous of establishing the Educational Institutions. One of the criteria for granting permission is that there should be a need for providing educational facilities for the people in the locality to quantify the educational needs. The parameters for determining the adequacy for starting a new college have been prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.114, dated 09.08.2000, whereunder a surplus of SSC pass outs 220 or more is considered to be viable for a new college of two sections. 12. The Government had issued G.O.Rt.No.496, SE (Exams) Department, dated 04.12.2024 identifying viability to start 47 new Private Un-aided Junior Colleges in 37 Mandals and 6 Colleges in Municipal areas for the academic year 2025-26. Pursuant thereto, applications were invited for establishment of Junior Colleges in those areas vide notification dated 06.12.2024. The Lingapalem Mandal was not identified in the G.O.Rt.No.496 as an area viable to start a new junior college. 13. On applications of the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 to start a new Junior College, comprehensive reports were submitted independently vis-a-vis Respondent Nos.3 and 4. As per the report, the proposed college of Respondent No.3 is a G plus 2 RCC building of 10,458 sft., with 2 acres of playground, while the proposed college of Respondent No.4 is a G plus 2 RCC building of 10,650 sft. 14. Taking note of the reports, the impugned orders came to be passed in exercise of power of exemption under Section 100 of the A.P.Education Act, 1982 (for short ‘the Act’). The Section 100 of the Act contemplates power to be exercised for reasons specified and the same reads as under; “ Section 100: The Government may, by notification and for reasons to be specified therein, exempt any educational - institution from the operation of all or any of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder, subject to such conditions as they may deem fit to impose and may likewise vary or cancel such exemption(emphasised).” 15. In the impugned orders, there are absolutely no reasons assigned for issuing the impugned proceedings in relaxation of the viability issues. In the impugned orders, there are absolutely no reasons assigned for issuing the impugned proceedings in relaxation of the viability issues. In the light of G.O.Rt.No.496, dated 04.12.2024 referred supra, compelling reasons should be forthcoming in the impugned proceedings for bypassing the viability requirement to start a new college. The counter affidavit of Respondent No.1 states about the changing trends of education, reasons for issuing the impugned G.Os, but the reasons appear to be vague and general in nature and this Court is not satisfied with those reasons. 16. As regards the locus of the Petitioner, the Division Bench of this Court in Adithya Junior College v. Sri Akshara Junior College and others , 2024 0 Supreme (AP) 967 considered this aspect and held that Petitioners do have locus standi. The paragraph 32 thereof is extracted below: 32. Coming to the other contention with rgard to the 'locus standi' of the writ petitioners, Rule 4 (2) of the Rules, 1987 inter alia contemplates that 'no permission shall be granted, if the opening of a new institution is likely to create unhealthy and undesirable competition with another institution of the same class or category, in the area.' In the light of the statutory provisions referred to supra, granting of permission without verification of the relevant aspects or report, amounts to violation of the Rules and effects the rights of the writ petitioners to impart education in a healthy and competitive manner. The establishment of the Educational Institution in question without adherence to the statutory provisions certainly effects the writ petitioners' interest and therefore they have 'locus' to question the Government Order dated 02.01.2023. As such, the writ petition instituted by them is maintainable. Be that as it may.' 17. Though the counsel for the Petitioner sought to rely on this judgement to substantiate his contention that even to exercise power under Section 100 of the Act, the requirements of Section 20(3) of the Act have to be followed. This Court is not inclined to accept the same as scope of Section 100 of the Act did not fall for consideration in the said case. 18. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is allowed with following directions; (i) The impugned proceedings issued vide G.O.Rt.No.174, School Education (Exams) Department, dated 07.05.2025 and G.O.Rt.No.183, School Education (Exams) Department, dated 12.05.2025 are set-aside. 18. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is allowed with following directions; (i) The impugned proceedings issued vide G.O.Rt.No.174, School Education (Exams) Department, dated 07.05.2025 and G.O.Rt.No.183, School Education (Exams) Department, dated 12.05.2025 are set-aside. (ii) The Respondent No.1 is at liberty to re-examine the application of Respondent Nos.3 and 4 to start new Private Un-aided Junior Colleges on the basis of the comprehensive committee reports and pass appropriate orders with reasons. (iii) No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.