Back
2011 Supreme(Kar) 24
High Court of Karnataka
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. NAGAMOHAN DAS
Air Force School Parent’s Welfare Association, Rep By its Secretary Bengalaru Versus
The State of Karnataka by its Secretary & Others
Case No : W.P. No.34192 of 2009 (EDN) C/W W.P.No.24654 of 2005 (GM-Res) & W.P.No.15296 of 2009 (EDN)
Decided on : 10-01-2011
For the Petitioner:Kiran C.V., M/s Rex Lex Inc, L. Govindaraj, Ramesh Chandra, Advocates.
For the Respondents:R1 - Ashok Haranahalli, Adv. General A/W Keshava Reddy, GA & K.S. Malli Karjunaiah, GP, R2 - M.R. Shylendra, R3 & R4 - H. Jayakara Shetty, Advocates.
The amendment excluding ICSE and CBSE syllabus schools from the purview of the Education Act is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Headnote:
Education Act - The court examines the constitutional validity of the amendment to the Karnataka Education Act excluding ICSE and CBSE syllabus schools from its purview. The court concludes that the amendment is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The court also discusses the provisions of the Education Act related to the regulation of private unaided schools, fixation of school fees, and resolution of disputes related to fee hikes.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, parents and parent's associations, are challenging the hike in school fees made by respondent schools as arbitrary, unilateral, unjust, and illegal. The petitioner in W.P. No. 24654/2008 is also challenging the appointment of respondent No. 4 as the Principal of the school. The petitioner filed a petition before the Government of Karnataka under Sections 131 and 133 of the Karnataka Education Act, but it was dismissed as not maintainable. The main issues to be considered are whether Section 1 (iii-a) of the Karnataka Education Act is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, and whether the impugned circulars and letters issued by the respondent schools hiking the school fee are arbitrary and illegal.
Finding of the Court:
The court examines the importance and history of education in India, the purpose of education, and the achievements and problems in the education system after independence. The court also discusses the content of education, regulation of private unaided schools, and the constitutional validity of the amendment excluding ICSE and CBSE syllabus schools from the purview of the Education Act. The court concludes that the amendment is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The court also quashes the impugned circulars and letters issued by the respondent schools and reserves the liberty to the schools to fix the school fee in accordance with the Education Act and the Rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The amendment excluding ICSE and CBSE syllabus schools from the purview of the Education Act is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The impugned circulars and letters issued by the respondent schools hiking the school fee are quashed. The schools are allowed to fix the school fee in accordance with the Education Act and the Rules. The order dismissing the petitioner's petition under Sections 131 and 133 of the Education Act is quashed and the government is directed to consider the petitioner's claim in accordance with the law.
Result: The writ petitions are allowed. The amendment to the Karnataka Education Act is quashed. The impugned circulars and letters issued by the respondent schools are quashed. The schools are allowed to fix the school fee in accordance with the Education Act and the Rules. The order dismissing the petitioner's petition is quashed and the government is directed to consider the petitioner's claim in accordance with the law.
1. In all these writ petitions the respondent – schools are situated in different parts of Karnataka and they are affiliated to Indian Council for Secondary Education (ICSE) or Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) syllabus. The Petitioners in W.P. No. 34192/2009 and W.P. No. 15296/2009 are the parents and parent’s associations of the students studying in the respondent schools. The parents and parent’s associations are before this Court questioning the hike in school fee made by respondent schools under the impugned circulars, letters of intimation etc., as arbitrary, unilateral, unjust and illegal.
2. The petitioner in W.P. No. 24654/2008 is an employee of respondent No. 3 school controlled and managed by respondent No. 2. The petitioner in his petition contends that office of Principal of the respondent school became vacant on account of retirement of the then principal on 31.05.2005. In anticipation of the vacancy of Principal post respondent No. 2 invited applications from eligible candidates to fill the vacancy vide their notification dated 09.02.2005 as per Annexure E. The petitioner submitted her application as per Annexure F for the post of Principal. Overlooking the claim of petitioner, the respondent No. 2 appointed respondent No. 4 as the Principal. Aggrieved by the appointment of respondent No. 4 as the Principal, the petitioner filed a petition before respondent No. 1 – Government of Karnataka under Sections 131 and 133 of the Karnataka Education Act (for short ‘Education Act’). Respondent No. 2 entered appearance before the Government and filed objections inter alia contending that the provisions of the Education Act are not applicable to the educational institutions affiliated to ICSE and CBSE syllabus schools including respondent No. 3 herein which is affiliated to CBSE syllabus. At that time the petitioner filed this writ petition questioning the constitutional validity of Karnataka Act 8 of 1998 amending the Education Act excluding the schools affiliated to ICSE and CBSE syllabus from the purview of Education Act. During the pendency of the writ petition, respondent No. 1 – Government dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 131 and 133 of the Education Act as not maintainable on the ground that the provisions of the Education Act are not applicable to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 schools.
3. Heard arguments on both the side and perused the entire writ papers. On the basis of pleadings and arguments the following points will arise from my consideration.
i. Whether Section 1 (iii-a) of the Karnataka Education Act as amended by Karnataka Act 8 of 1998 is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India?
ii. Whether the impugned circulars, letters of intimation etc., issued by the respondent schools hiking the school fee are liable to be quashed as arbitrary, unilateral, illegal, unjust and unreasonable?
4. In order to decide these two points it is necessary to know what is the importance of education and the history of education in India.
The purpose of education
5. It has been said that the process of evolution from ignorance to knowledge, from knowledge to wisdom and from wisdom to understanding of consciousness takes place through education. It is the education that helps to develop the capacity, talent in human nature and to co-ordinate their expression for the enrichment and progress of society. It is the education which teaches purity of mind, righteousness of conduct and truthfulness of soul and power to assert right. Education has its functionalism in all most all spheres of life. It is a continuous and creative process. Today education is a social as well as political necessity. Further the education has become a basic need for every human being in the present scientific world. The Education Commission popularly called as ‘KOTHARI COMMISSION 1964-66’ in its repot said, “Education as Instrument of Change. If this change on a grand scale is to be achi
