In all these writ applications which have been heard together, the petitioner schools, have assailed the order dated 15.6.2002 passed by the Chairman of the Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board (hereinafter referred to as “the Board”) as also the order dated 21.7.2008 passed by the State Government whereby and whereunder the aforementioned order of the Chairman of the Sanskrit Shiksha Board as with regard to the cancellation of the recognition of 86 Sanskrit schools has been affirmed. A further prayer has been made to also quash the order of the State Government dated 5.3.2012 wherein the State Government while restoring the recognition of fifteen out of eighty-four schools which were earlier cancelled by the order of the Chairman of Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board dated 15.6.2012 and reiterated by the State Government in its order dated 21.7.2008 has taken a decision to withdraw recognition of rest of sixty-nine schools. A consequential prayer in all these writ applications have also been made that upon quashing of the aforementioned impugned orders dated 15.6.2002, 21.7.2008 and 5.3.2012, not only the status of the petitioners' school of being recognized Sanskrit schools should be restored but a direction be also issued to the Respondents for making payment of arrear and current salary to all the teaching and non-teaching staff w.e.f. 15.6.2002 as was being paid to them prior to 15.6.2002.

2. At the outset it has to be clarified that the entire pleadings in this batch of fourteen writ petitions involving same issue relating to 38 Sanskrit school petitioners has been made by all the parties in C.W.J.C. No. 1727/2009 which is taken to be the leading case for reference of all the documents and the various interim orders passed by this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the impugned orders cancelling recognition of 86 very old recognized Sanskrit schools by one stroke of pen is wholly bad both on fact and in law. In this regard, they have submitted that some of the schools in fact were recognized even 100 years back and in any event, all of them had continued with the recognition for at least 25 years but even their recognition have been cancelled on more ipsi-dixit without considering their individual cases as also prevailing norms existing at the time of grant of their recognition.

4. In this regard, they have also pointed out that these petitioners schools had been recognized in view of the prevalent government policy and thus their de-recognition could have been made only in case of their breach and not on the basis of new guidelines applicable to newly established Sanskrit schools. It has also been highlighted that all the 86 schools de-recognized under the impugned orders were actually found to be fit for its being made Government Sanskrit Schools in the year 1989 when on the other hand, the matter relating to takeover of 429 Sanskrit schools is still pending in the Supreme Court, the respondents have deliberately passed the impugned orders only in order to deprive them of the same benefit of takeover of the schools and consequential payment of salary as in the case of rest of 341 schools.

5. It has also been submitted that there is only one provision for de-recognition of the schools which were recognized prior to constitution of the Board in the year 1979, namely, Rule 6 of fcgkj vjktdh; laLd`r fo|ky; ¼izLohd`fr ,oa 'krZ½ fu;ekoyh] 1993 (hereinafter to be referred to as “the 1993 Rules”) but neither in the show-cause notice were issued to any of the petitioner school in terms of Rule 6 of the 1993 Rules nor even the impugned orders are in consonance with the requirement laid down under the same Rule 6 of the 1993 Rules. They in this regard have also referred to and relied on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 12.5.2010 in LPA No. 366 of 2009 (Kalika Prasad Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) wherein according to them, the same impugned order has been quashed while re