SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(SC) 1580

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
L. Nageswara Rao, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ.
Sant Gajanan Maharaj Education And Social Welfare Society & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Maharashtra & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 823 of 2019, 824 of 2019, 825 of 2019, 826 of 2019; Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 34968 of 2017, 34969 of 2017, 34998 of 2017, 34999 of 2017
Decided On : 15-01-2019

Advocates Appeared:
Anagha S Desai, Adv., Satyajit A Desai, Adv., Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, Adv., Anoop Kandari, Adv.

Detailed information must be provided to the Competent Authority for scrutiny and decision on reimbursement of scholarships disbursed.

Headnote:

Scholarship - Post-Matric Vocational Courses - The court directed the appellants to provide detailed information to the Competent Authority of the State for scrutiny and reimbursement of scholarships disbursed to students.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants claimed reimbursement for scholarships disbursed to students for post-matric vocational courses, which were allegedly covered by a Government Scheme. The High Court dismissed the writ petitions due to lack of specific details and rejected review petitions/applications for the same reason.

Finding of the Court:

The court directed the appellants to lay the requisite information before the Competent Authority of the State for scrutiny and decision on reimbursement, within a period of six weeks.

Issues: Reimbursement of scholarships for post-matric vocational courses under a Government Scheme.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for detailed information to be provided to the Competent Authority for scrutiny and decision on reimbursement.

Final Decision: The orders of the High Court were modified, and the appeals were disposed of with directions to provide detailed information to the Competent Authority for reimbursement.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and have considered the matter.

3. The appellants claim that the post-matric vocational courses offered by it to the students for the different years in question i.e. from year 2011-2012 to 2014-2015 are covered by a Government Scheme which contemplates grant of scholarship to the students. According to the appellants, in anticipation, the appellant ? society had disbursed scholarship and had incurred expenditure from its own funds which is required to be reimbursed.

4. The High Court dismissed the writ petitions on the ground that details of the students and the amounts provided including the date(s) when such scholarships were awarded have not been mentioned/furnished. When the appellants tried to bring the said materials on record by means of review petitions/applications, the High Court thought it proper to reject the review petitions/applications on the ground that at the stage of review such particulars cannot be furnished. Aggrieved, the present appeals have been filed.

5. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. It has been pointed out on behalf of the appellants that the required record/materials are voluminous and would require translation into English for which time has been prayed for.

6. If there are materials on record to show that the appellants had, indeed, disbursed the scholarships to the students and the State is of the view that the courses offered by the appellant - society come under its scheme(s) for grant of scholarship, the appellants would be entitled to reimbursement. The details in this regard, therefore, can very well be scrutinized, once the same are placed before the Competent Authority of the State and thereafter an appropriate decision can be taken by such authority. We, therefore, do not propose to keep the present appeals pending any longer. Instead, we deem it proper to close the present appeals by directing the appellants to lay the requisite information, in full details, before the Competent Authority of the State, whereafter, the said Authority will take an informed decision in the matter as expeditiously as possible and, in any case, within a period of six weeks from the date when the materials are made available to the Competent Authority by the appellants. We also make it clear that in the event the Competent Authority feels it necessary to hear the appellants or to seek clarification(s) from the appellants it will not hesitate to do so.

7. The appellants will be at full liberty to avail of such remedy/remedies as may be available in law against the order(s) to be passed by the Competent Authority in terms of the present directions.

8. With the aforesaid observations the orders of the High Court shall stand modified and the appeals shall stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top