2009 Supreme(SC) 1792

2009(8) Supreme 297
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Altamas Kabir and Cyriac Joseph, JJ.
State of U.P. & Ors. — Appellants
versus
Committee of Management, Mata Tapeshwari Saraswati Vidya Mandir & Ors. —Respondents
Special Leave Petition (C) No. 4630 of 2008
Decided on : 02-12-2009

Headnote:Constitution of India,1950 – Article 14 – Writ petition filed by Respondent institutions Junior High Schools – Case of Respondent institutions that, although, they had earlier been denied the benefit of grant – in – aid for their Junior High School section they were still hoping to be brought within the ambit of the grant– in–aid for the Junior High School Section comprising classes 6 to 8- The expectations of the Respondent institutions were negated when by its Notification Directorate of Basic Education, U.P. decided to bring 1000 unaided permanently recognized (A class) Junior High Schools on its grant–in–aid list but included a condition that only Junior High Schools would be entitled to apply – It was categorically indicated that institutions imparting education below or higher than classes 6 to 8 would not be eligible to Apply – As a result of this Respondent institutions were completely excluded from the grant-in-aid Scheme-Grievance of respondent institutions that inasmuch as, a decision had been taken by the State Government not to provide grant – in-aid to educational institutions for Junior High Schools after their upgradation as High Schools or Intermediate Colleges, an exception was made in respect of institutions which had been receiving grant–in–aid for their Junior High School sections despite the fact that the said institutions had been upgraded – Accepting the case made out by Respondent institutions that the creation of a class within a class was not only unfair and unreasonable but also offended the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, Single Judge of High Court, quashed condition No.2(13) of State Government. – Appeal preferred by the State of U.P – Dismissed by High Court – Special Leave Petitions -. –Admittedly, some of Junior High Schools had been enjoying the benefit of the grant–in– aid Scheme on the basis of seniority having regard to the cut-off date (30.6.1984) for grant of recognition to Junior High Schools – Respondent institutions were not considered for the grant–in–aid Scheme as they had not been granted recognition as Junior High Schools prior to the said cut–off date – Since most of the Junior High Schools had subsequently been upgraded and granted recognition to conduct higher classes from classes 9 to 12 and by virtue of the 1921 Act were disentitled to receive aid at the Junior High School level, State Government by inserting 13A in 1978 Act sought to protect their interests by continuing the application of the 1978 Act to those institutions which had been upgraded, but were already receiving grant-in-aid for Junior High School section – It was by virtue of the amended provisions of Section 13 – A that a class within a class was being sought to be created in perpetuity – The application of the 1978 Act only to educational institutions which received grant-in-aid prior to 30th June, 1984,was rightly held to be arbitrary by High Court – Such provision was in violation of the equality clause enshrined in Article 14 of Constitution – Reasoning of High Court that if it was the intention of State Government to extend aid to unaided institutions at the Junior High School level for improving the quality of education at said level, it ought not to have excluded those institutions who continued to run Junior High Schools, but had been upgraded for the purpose of imparting education at the High School and Intermediate College level – The object sought to be achieved by notification of 9th September, 2006, had no intelligible nexus with the object it wished to achieve – Orders passed by Single Judge and the Division Bench of High Court upheld – Special Leave Petitions dismissed. (Paras 19 to 24)

       Facts of the Case :

        Writ petition was filed by Respondent institutions Junior High Schools herein in the instant case. Case of Respondent institutions was that, although, they had earlier been denied the benefit of grant-in-aid for their Junior High School section they were still hoping to be brought within the ambit of the grant-in-aid for the Junior High School Section comprising classes 6 to 8.The expectations of the Respondent institutions were negated when by its Notification Directorate of Basic Education, U.P. decided to bring 1000 unaided permanently recognized (A class) Junior High Schools on its grant-in-aid list but included a condition that only Junior High Schools would be entitled to apply. It was categorically indicated that institutions imparting education below or higher than classes 6 to 8 would not be eligible to Apply. As a result of this Respondent institutions were completely excluded from the grant-in-aid Scheme It was Grievance of respondent institutions that inasmuch as, a decision had been taken by the State Government not to provide grant-in-aid to educational institutions for Junior High Schools after their upgradation as High Schools or Intermediate Colleges, an exception was made in respect of institutions which had been receiving grant-in-aid for their Junior High School sections despite the fact that the said institutions had been upgraded. Accepting the case made out by Respondent institutions that the creation of a class within a class was not only unfair and unreasonable but also offended the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, Single Judge of High Court, quashed condition No.2(13) of State Government. Appeal preferred by the State of U.P was Dismissed by High Court .

        2. Present Special Leave Petitions have been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

        Admittedly, some of Junior High Schools had been enjoying the benefit of the grant-in- aid Scheme on the basis of seniority having regard to the cut-off date (30.6.1984) for grant of recognition to Junior High Schools. Respondent institutions were not considered for the grant-in-aid Scheme as they had not been granted recognition as Junior High Schools prior to the said cut-off date. Since most of the Junior High Schools had subsequently been upgraded and granted recognition to conduct higher classes from classes 9 to 12 and by virtue of the 1921 Act were disentitled to receive aid at the Junior High School level, State Government by inserting 13A in 1978 Act sought to protect their interests by continuing the application of the 1978 Act to those institutions which had been upgraded, but were already receiving grant-in-aid for Junior High School section. It was by virtue of the amended provisions of Section 13-A that a class within a class was being sought to be created in perpetuity. The application of the 1978 Act only to educational institutions which received grant-in-aid prior to 30th June, 1984,was rightly held to be arbitrary by High Court. Such provision was in violation of the equality clause enshrined in Article 14 of Constitution. Reasoning of High Court that if it was the intention of State Government to extend aid to unaided institutions at the Junior High School level for improving the quality of education at said level, it ought not to have excluded those institutions who continued to run Junior High Schools, but had been upgraded for the purpose of imparting education at the High School and Intermediate College level. The object sought to be achieved by notification of 9th September, 2006, had no intelligible nexus with the object it wished to achieve. Orders passed by Single Judge and the Division Bench of High Court were upheld - Special Leave Petitions were dismissed.