IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S. G. MEHARE, SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
Matoshri Panai Sevabhavi Shikshan Sanstha - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.11647 OF 2024
Decided On : 13-02-2025
(A) Maharashtra Primary Education Act, 1949 - Regulation 109 - Government Resolutions dated 24.04.2018 and 13.01.2021 - Transfer of Ashram School - Petitioners challenged the transfer of the school to another institution after their approval was cancelled for non-compliance with regulations - The court found that the petitioners failed to follow due process and did not disclose material facts regarding their participation in the fresh allotment process. (Paras 4, 10, 18, 19)
(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The court emphasized that the petitioners must first exhaust their appellate remedies before seeking judicial intervention, as the legality of the cancellation and transfer of the school was still under review by the Appellate Authority. (Paras 21, 22)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners contested the transfer of a primary Ashram School to another institution after their approval was cancelled due to non-compliance with regulations. They argued that the transfer was illegal and that they had not been given a fair opportunity to present their case. (Paras 4, 5)
Findings of Court:
The court found no merit in the petitioners' claims, noting that they had participated in a fresh advertisement process for the school allotment after their registration was cancelled, and their appeal against the cancellation was still pending. (Paras 18, 22)
Issues: The main issues included whether the petitioners were entitled to challenge the transfer of the school after their registration was cancelled and whether they had followed the proper procedures for appeal. (Paras 19, 21)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioners' failure to disclose material facts and their participation in the fresh allotment process undermined their claims, and they must first seek resolution through the Appellate Authority. (Paras 18, 21)
Result: Both writ petitions stand dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
(S. G. Mehare, J.) :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties.
2. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.11647 of 2024 has impugned the order of transferring the primary Ashram School of Baradari to the respondent No.6 Sanjivani Medical Training Center, Kaudgaon, Taluka and District Ahmednagar by impugned order dated 01.10.2024.
3. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.12917 of 2024 has impugned the order dated 27.04.2022 cancelling the approval of the school which was subsequently transferred to the petitioner in Writ Petition No.11647 of 2024 by the impugned order. He has also impugned the order dated 01.10.2024 transferring the said school to the respondent No.6 institution.
4. The facts of the case in brief were that the petitioner Virbhadra Dongar Parisar Gramin Vikas Pratishtahan Sanstha was allotted a primary Ashram School. However, the said institution failed to follow the rules and regulations. Therefore, their approval was cancelled by order dated 27.04.2022. It neither preferred the appeal nor impugned the said order. However, thereafter, they had impugned the said order by way of appeal. In the mean time, the school was transferred to the petitioner in Writ Petition No.11467 of 2024 and subsequently it was also cancelled and transferred to respondent No.6. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.11647 of 2024 had preferred the appeal before the Hon’ble Minister against the cancellation of the approval. The Hon’ble Minister by order dated 24.08.2023 dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, by following due process, the impugned order dated 01.10.2024 was passed.
5. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.11647 of 2024 has assailed the impugned order mainly on the grounds that by the communication dated 21.06.2022, it was transferred to the petitioner by following due procedure by order dated 29.06.2022. However, respondent No.2 without notice to the petitioner and following the due procedure of law has cancelled and transferred it to the respondent No.6. Thereafter, the advertisement was issued for granting sanction transfer. However, by writ petition No.6983 of 2023 the advertisement was stayed and respondent Nos.1 and 2 were directed to decide the appeal on merit. They have assailed the reasons assigned for the rejection of their appeal. There was no fault on the part of the petitioner. Not following the procedure of transferring the institution to the petitioner by order dated 29.06.2022, it should not be faulted with and punished.
6. The respondent No.6 has heavily assailed the petition containing that the allotment/sanction of the school to the petitioner was in violation of the norms.
7. In the nutshell, the issue revolve around the cancellation of the registration and transferring the Ashram School.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners have referred to the certain Government Resolutions prescribing the procedure for allotting the Ashram school, cancelling the registration as well as transferring the school after its closure. Hence, we would like to refer certain relevant rules/procedure laid in the Government Resolution dated 24.04.2018. This Government Resolution speaks of transferring /shifting the closed Ashram school to another institution. The procedure has been laid down in Clause-A, in brief it provides that after the school registration is cancelled a public advertisement be published in the State level newspaper through the concerned Directorate. The next condition was that the school of which registration is cancelled and is granted aid should be transferred in the same revenue division. The interested institution must be registered under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 having the object of education running, residential school. Such institution should be in Maharashtra State only. After the proposal is submitted, pursuant to the advertisement District/Regional offices of the concerned Directorate should submit the illegalities of such institution to the Government alon
The court ruled that petitioners must exhaust appellate remedies before challenging the transfer of an Ashram School, emphasizing the importance of following due process and disclosing material facts....
The court upheld the validity of the Government Resolution allowing the transfer of derecognized schools, emphasizing that petitioners lacked standing as they had been absorbed into other institution....
The government has the authority to transfer derecognized schools, and petitioners lacked standing to challenge the transfer as they were not affected parties.
The court established that educational authorities must adhere to statutory procedures and principles of natural justice when taking drastic actions against educational institutions.
The Transfer of Management Act 1971 requires strict adherence to procedural safeguards, including the right to a fair hearing, before any drastic action such as transferring management can be taken a....
Point of Law : When any statutory provision provides a particular manner for doing a particular act, the said thing or act must be done in accordance with the manner prescribed therefor in the Act. M....
Point of law : when any statutory provision provides a particular manner for doing a particular act, the said thing or act must be done in accordance with the manner prescribed therefor in the Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.