SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(Cal) 378

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Bhagabati Prosad Banerjee & Vidya Nand, JJ.
Nabadwip Chandra Das & other – Appellants
Versus
West Bengal Board of Secondary Education & other – Respondents
C.O.T. No. 1316 of 1997 with F.M.A.T. No. 2784 of 1996
Decided On: September 24, 1997

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Asok De, P.S. Bhattacharjee and Raja Bhattacharjee for the Petitioners.
Mr. S.A. Khan for the M.C.
Mr. Pran Gopal Saha for the State.

The right to education includes the right to recognition and affiliation of schools, and the State cannot arbitrarily deny recognition or affiliation to a school that meets the prescribed criteria.

Headnote:

EDUCATION - RIGHT TO EDUCATION - RECOGNITION OF SCHOOL - GRANT OF AFFILIATION - BOARD'S REJECTION OF APPLICATION - COURT'S INTERVENTION - PRINCIPLES GOVERNING RECOGNITION AND AFFILIATION - CONDITIONS IMPOSABLE BY STATE - RIGHT TO EDUCATION AS PART OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT UNDER ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION.

Fact of the Case:

Amulya Vidya Bhaban, a school established in 1972 and functioning since 1975, applied for recognition from the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. The Board rejected the application on grounds of non-payment of requisite fee, non-adherence to staff pattern and norms, and the existence of other schools in the vicinity. The school challenged the Board's decision in court.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Board's rejection of the school's application was arbitrary and unreasonable. It emphasized the importance of education as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution and the State's obligation to provide free and compulsory education to children up to the age of 14 years. The court also noted that the school had been functioning for several years and had a significant number of students enrolled.

Issues: 1. Whether the Board's rejection of the school's application for recognition was justified. 2. Whether the right to education includes the right to recognition and affiliation of schools.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on several Supreme Court judgments, including Unni Krishanan v. State of Andhra Pradesh and K.O. She part & other v. Union of India, to establish the following principles governing recognition and affiliation of schools: 1. The right to education is a fundamental right flowing from the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. 2. The State is obligated to provide free and compulsory education to children up to the age of 14 years. 3. Recognition and affiliation of schools are essential for the effective implementation of the right to education. 4. The State can impose reasonable conditions for recognition and affiliation, but it cannot arbitrarily deny recognition or affiliation to a school that meets the prescribed criteria.

Final Decision: The court set aside the Board's order rejecting the school's application for recognition and directed the Board to grant recognition and affiliation to the school within two months. The court also directed the State to approve the service of the school's teachers and non-teaching staff in accordance with the prescribed rules and regulations.

JUDGMENT

Bhagabati Prosad Banerjee, J.

1. Against the judgment and order dated 31.7.1996 passed by the Hon'ble Justice Dilip Kumar Basu, an appeal have been preferred by the Board and the Writ Petitioners-Opposite Parties have also filed cross-objections. By the judgment dated 31.7.1996, the learned Judge have quashed the order passed by the President of the Board dated 15.11.1995. By that order the President of the Board, rejected the application for recognition of Amulya Bidya Bhaban Junior High School on the stereotype ground, which are as follows:-

(1) The School has not applied in the prescribed form with a requisite fee of Rs. 25/- by 1975 to the Board.

(2) Teaching and non-teaching staff were appointed not keeping in view of the staff pattern and without observing the existing norms.

(3) There are two Secondary Junior High Schools within the radius of 4/5 k.m. and as such another Junior High School will not be a viable.

2. The learned Single Judge after considering the entire facts and circumstances and various cases, held that the order of the President of the Board could not be sustained and directed the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education to grant recognition of the School for Class-V to Class-VIII from the academic session 1996-97 and the provisional upgradation has to be granted upto Class-VIII so that there is no drop out in the School after Class-VIII. School will generate momentum gradually and the School will be upgraded. It was further directed that the State Government was entitled to introduce the scheme for absorption of the teachers or appointment of teachers according to the prescribed rules and guidelines as amended up-to-date. The State Government was also given liberty to vary the terms of appointment so that the students of the School concerned get the best teachers who would be accountable to the student community.

3. The said Amulya Vidya Bhaban was established in 1972 and had been functioning without any Interruption since 1975 with the aid and assistance of local people who are Interested in the eradication of illiteracy and spreading out of education to common people, on it piece of land contributed by the people of the locality. The petitioners herein who applied for certain order are all teaching and non-teaching staff of the said School. It appears that the teachers had requisite qualification for being appointed as teacher and non-teaching staff of the said School and the said School is a co-educational four class Junior High School. Since 1978, various representations, appeals and requisitions have been made for the purpose of recognition of the said School.

4. Spate of litigation followed and several orders were passed by this Court. Firstly, in C.O. No. 10017 (W) of 1991 which was directed to bold an inspection of the said School and to consider the case of recognition on the basis of the report in the matter. Inspections were held, reports were submitted pursuant to the said order dated 31.3.1994. But the said report of the District Level Inspection Team forwarded without any comment. Another inspection was held pursuant to the order of this Court and the said two reports were found to be contradictory and ultimately the matter was considered in the third writ application in C.O. No. 14256(W) of 1994, whereupon an order was passed on 7.12.1994. The entire order is set out herein-below:-

"Having regard to the fact that there are two contradictory reports submitted by the District Level Inspection Team in connection with grant of recognition to the School in question, it is submitted by Mr. Moloy Kumar Basu, learned advocate, appearing for the petitioners that an independent enquiry should be conducted to ascertain the correct position with regard to the running of the School in question.

Let this matter stand over till four weeks after the Christmas Vacation. In the meantime, the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Tamluk, is directed to conduct an independent enquiry for the purpose of gran
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top