Writ Petition No. 9970 of 2012. Case: Mirai Bahuddeshiya Vikas Sanstha Vs The State of Maharashtra and Ors.. High Court of Bombay (India)

Case NumberWrit Petition No. 9970 of 2012
CounselFor Appellant: S.B. Talekar, Advocate and For Respondents: S.G. Karlekar, Asst. Government Pleader
JudgesS. S. Shinde and Sangitrao S. Patil, JJ.
IssueEducation Law
Judgement DateMay 04, 2016
CourtHigh Court of Bombay (India)

Judgment:

Sangitrao S. Patil, J.

  1. Heard. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is heard finally.

  2. The petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "Transferee Institution") has challenged the vires of the Government Resolution bearing No. A.Aa.Sha.2009/Pra.Kra. 126/Ka.11, issued by the Department of Tribal Development, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai, on 14.09.2012, where under the Ashram School which was transferred to the petitioner has been ordered to be re-transferred to respondent No. 5 (hereinafter referred to as "Original Institution") and the recognition of the Ashram School granted in favour of the Transferee Institution vide Government Resolution dated 04.03.2010 came to be withdrawn.

  3. There is no dispute that the Ashram School run by the Original Institution at village Kawadshi (Bor). Taluka Varora, District Chandrapur, came to be de-recognized by respondent No. 2 as per the order dated 27.02.2009, on the allegations that there was mismanagement of the Ashram School, there was no sufficient strength of the students, no adequate infrastructure was available, etc. The Original Institution preferred an appeal under Rule 2.19 of the Ashram School Code, against the order dated 27.02.2009 to the Secretary of the Tribal Development Department. Pursuant to the hearing of that appeal held on 12.05.2009, the Original Institution was given an opportunity to remove the deficiencies by September 2009, with a view to save the tribal students from suffering the loss in their academic career as per the order dated 19.05.2009. The Original Institution did not remove the deficiencies within the given time. Therefore, respondent No. 2 sent a letter dated 25.09.2009 and recommended that the Ashram School run by the Original Institution should be de-recognized permanently. Accordingly, the Ashram School run by the Original Institution came to be de-recognized and the Ashram School so de-recognized was ordered to be transferred to the Transferee Institution vide Government Resolution dated 04.03.2010.

  4. The Government Resolution dated 04.03.2010 came to be stayed by respondent No. 1 as per the order dated 28.05.2010. The said stay order was communicated to the Transferee Institution vide letter dated 01.06.2010. The President of the Transferee Institution made representations against the stay order before the Cabinet Minister as well as the Minister of State, Tribal Development Department, Government of Maharashtra, but it was of no avail. Ultimately, the Transferee Institution received Government Resolution dated 14.09.2012 issued by respondent No. 1 whereunder the Government Resolution dated 04.03.2010 came to be cancelled and the Ashram School was ordered to be re-transferred to the Original Institution for being run again subject to certain terms and conditions. It is this Resolution which has been challenged by the Transferee Institution by this Writ Petition.

  5. The learned Counsel for the Transferee Institution submits that the stay order dated 28.05.2010 as well as the final order as contained in the Government Resolution dated 14.09.2012 have been passed behind the back of the Transferee Institution, without extending an opportunity of hearing. He submits that once the Ashram School was transferred to the Transferee Institution, as per the provisions contained in the Ashram School Code, the said school could not have been de-recognized without hearing the Transferee Institution. He submits that the decision to grant ex-parte stay on 28.05.2010 and the decision to de-recognize the Ashram School allotted to the Transferee Institution and re-transferring it to Original Institution as per the Government Resolution dated 14.09.2012 are arbitrary, colourable, illegal and unconstitutional.

  6. The learned Counsel for the Transferee Institution further submits that two more Ashram Schools were transferred by respondent No. 1 from Kinala (Borli), Taluka: Umred, District: Nagpur to Sane Nagar, Amalner District: Jalgaon and from Devgaon, Taluka: Chandur (Railway), District:Amravati to Patharkheda, Taluka: Erandol, District: Jalgaon as per the Government Resolutions dated 04.03.2010. However, the said Ashram Schools have not been de-recognized by respondent No. 1. This shows that the de-recognition of Ashram School of the Transferee Institution has been done with mala fide intention causing discrimination. He submits that as per Rule 2.23 of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT