IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that educational authorities must adhere to statutory procedures and principles of natural justice when taking drastic actions against educational institutions.

JUDGMENT :

(Shailesh P. Brahme, J.) :

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard the litigating sides finally at the admission stage with their consent.

2. The petitioners are office bearers of registered trust namely Marathwada Banjara Seva Sangh, which runs seven Ashram Schools in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (Aurangabad). They are invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge order dated 29.03.2023 passed by the respondent No. 2/Desk Officer Other Backward Bahujan Social Welfare Department, for appointment of administrator, order dated 18.04.2023 issued by the respondent No. 4/Deputy Director, order dated 15.12.2023 issued by the respondent No. 2 and consequential order dated 27.12.2023 issued by the respondent No. 3/Director for withdrawal of recognition of seven Ashram Schools. We propose to decide the matters by common judgment and order as there are common grounds of challenge. We are referring the parties as per their status in Writ Petition No. 1263 of 2024.

3. Marathwada Banjara Seva Sangh, Aurangabad (Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar) (hereinafter referred as to ‘Sangh’ for the sake of brevity and convenience) runs three Primary Ashram Schools, three Secondary Ashram Schools and one Higher Secondary Ashram School receiving 100% grant in aid. There was election of managing committee on 31.08.2009 for the period 2009-2011. The last change report was accepted on 16.04.2015. Other change reports are awaiting adjudication. We need not go into rivalry amongst the office bearers.

4. There were disputes amongst the members of the Sangh. The respondent No. 6 and others had made complaint regarding misappropriation and the cognizance was taken by the respondent No. 5 – Assistant Commissioner calling upon President/Secretary of the Sangh and the Head Masters vide notice dated 18.10.2022. Thereafter by letter dated 11.11.2022, he recommended the respondent No. 3 – Director and the respondent No. 1 – Secretary to appoint administrator considering mismanagement. The respondent No. 2 further forwarded the proposal to the respondent No. 1 vide letter dated 13.12.2022.

5. The respondent No. 5 – Assistant Commissioner issued notice to the office bearers of the Sangh and the Head Masters of the schools to submit their say within 15 days vide notice dated 08.03.2023. On 15.03.2023, the respondent No. 5 – Assistant Commissioner informed the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 that no say or any correspondence was received from the Sangh.

6. The respondent No. 1 informed the respondent No. 4 – Deputy Director that as no explanation or say was filed by the office bearers of the Sangh, the respondent No. 5 – Assistant Commissioner was appointed as administrator over 07 Ashram schools vide letter dated 29.03.2022 and he was further directed to submit proposal for de-recognition. In pursuance of that, an order was issued by the respondent No. 4 – Deputy Director appointing administrator for the year 2022-2023 stipulating certain terms. One of the terms was that if it was found that there was no improvement in the management, the Assistant Commissioner would submit proposal for de-recognition by the end of the academic year 2022-2023.

7. The respondent No. 5 - Assistant Commissioner reported to the respondent No. 4 – Deputy Director vide letter dated 05.06.2023 that there was no improvement and lack of coordination amongst the office bearers of the Sangh and recommended to revoke the recognition of 07 Ashram Schools. The proposal was forwarded to the Director and thereafter to the State Government vide letter dated 10.06.2023. Ultimately, the respondent No. 1 took a decision of withdrawing recognition of 7 Ashram schools, albeit, the schools were permitted to run till end of the academic year 2023-2024. Thereafter, the procedure for transferring the schools and students to new schools was also proposed.

8. We have heard learned counsels for the petitioners who are led by learned advocate Mr. P. B. Shirsat. He submits that impugned or