The failure to comply with directives issued by the Education Department prior to obtaining minority status cannot condone default in admitting students under the Right to Education Act, 2009.

JUDGMENT

R.D.Dhanuka, J. - Rule. Learned A.G.P. waives service for the respondent nos. 3 and 4. Mr.Bakhru, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 waives service. By consent of parties, writ petition is heard finally.

2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for an order and directions against the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to forthwith grant admission to his son, Master Rasesh Ashish Patel as per the allotment letter issued to the petitioner by the competent authorities under the Right to Education Act, 2009 in Standard I during the academic year 2020-21 or 2021-22.

3. The petitioner's son was issued a certificate of disability of persons with autism by Nair Hospital on 16th October, 2018. Sometime in the year 2019, he petitioner applied for online admission of his son under the Right to Education Act, 2009.

4. On 10th April, 2019, the respondent nos. 3 and 4 issued a letter of allotment under the provisions of Right to Education Act, 2009 thereby granting admission to the petitioner in the respondent no.1 school for the 1st standard English Medium. It was clearly provided that the applicant was to verify the documents before the committee between 11th April, 2019 to 26th April, 2019. It is the case of the petitioner that the competent authority vide letter dated 11th April, 2019 informed the respondent no.1 school directing the said school to grant admission to the petitioner under the provisions of Right to Education Act, 2009 in the said school after verifying the documents submitted before the committee.

5. The petitioner made a representation to the Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights. Vide letter dated 14th October, 2019, the Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights addressed a letter to the Education Inspector inviting his attention to the provisions of Right to Education Act, 2009 and directing the local Grievance Settlement Committee for redressal of the complaint at the local level.

6. The petitioner thereafter made a representation to the Education Department vide letter dated 19th August, 2019 informing that though the petitioner had visited the respondent no.1 school in the month of August 2019, the Administrative Officer of the school refused to grant admission to the petitioner inspite of the letter of allotment issued by the authority. The petitioner thus filed this writ petition.

7. Mr.Sadasivan, learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to various documents annexed to the petition and would submit that the respondent no.1 had included its name on the portal under the Right to Education Act, 2009 and based on the name having appeared on the portal, the competent authority had directed the respondent no.1 to grant admission to the petitioner under the 25% reservation under the Right to Education Act, 2009 as far back as on 10th April, 2019. He submits that though the petitioner had approached the respondent no.1 school, no admission was granted to the son of the petitioner by the respondent no.1.

8. It is submitted that the directives issued by the Education Officer to grant admission under the 25% quota under the provisions of Right to Education Act, 2009 is binding on the respondent no.1.

9. Mr.Bakhru, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 on the other hand would submit that the petitioner is not entitled to be admitted in the respondent no.1 school on the ground that the respondent no.1 being a minority unaided educational institution managed by the respondent no.2 which is a public charitable trust. He submits that the respondent no.2 had applied to the Government of Maharashtra, Minorities Development Department under the provisions of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004 for the status of Minority Educational Institution within the meaning of section 2(g) of the said Act. The Government of Maharashtra has conferred the respondent no.2 with the status of the