The regulations governing Anglo-Indian Schools did not interfere with the right of administration of minority institutions and were consistent with the principles laid down in TMA Pai Foundation’s case.

Radhakrishnan, J.

The Apex Court vide its order dated 1-4-2003 and 12-3-2003 in Civil Appeal No.4204 of 1984 and C.A. No.2334/2002 directed this court to rehear the appeals in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in TMA Pai Foundation & Others v. State of Karnataka & Others, (2002) 8 SCC 481 and hence these appeals have been posted before us for fresh hearing in the light of the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the above mentioned decision. While ordering so, the Apex Court has stated as follows:

“The several questions raised in these matters are covered by the decision of a Constitution Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 317/1993 – TMA Pai Foundation & Ors. Etc. vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. Etc. and connected batch decided on 31st October, 2002. Since larger questions have been decided by this Court, it becomes necessary for the High Court to re-examine the matter which have been decided and which are in appeal before this Court. The orders of the High Court are, therefore, set aside without expressing any opinion on merits and the matters are remitted to the High Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law.”

Writ petitions are moved by the Managers of schools run by Anglo-Indian Community. They are challenging some of rules framed by the State Government for Anglo-Indian Schools. Rules were published in the Gazette dated 10-9-1974. Certain rules according to the petitioners, violates Articles 15 and 30(1) of the Constitution of India and hence sought to be struck down. Learned single Judge had struck down rule 14 on the ground that it violates Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India and that rule 132 on the ground that it violates the guarantee contained in Article 15 of the Constitution of India. Learned single Judge repelled the challenge with regard to other rules. Aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge repelling the challenge in respect of rules 4(c), 15, 39, 53(2), 160, 161, 162, the proviso to rules 196, 197 and 244 petitioners filed WA. 37, 38, 39 and 61 of 1979. A Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 25th September 1980 upheld the challenge so far as rules 4(c), 39, 160, 161, sub rule (3) of rule 182, proviso to rule 196, rules 197 and 244 holding that those provisions are violative of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India. State took up the matter before the Apex Court. Judgment of this Court was set aside and the matter was remitted back. No appeal was preferred by the Management before the Apex Court and therefore we are in this case concerned only with the question as to whether rule 4(c), rule 39, rule 160, rule 161, subrule (3) of rule 182, proviso to rule 196, rule 197 and rule 244 are violative of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India. We have to examine the validity of these rules in the light of the decision of the apex court in TMA Pai Foundation’s case as ordered by the Supreme Court.

2. Apex Court in TMA Pai Foundation’s case posed as many as 11 questions of which we are concerned with question No.5(c) which is extracted below:

“Whether the statutory provisions which regulate the facets of administration like control over educational agencies, control over governing bodies, conditions of affiliation including recognition/withdrawal thereof, and appointment of staff, employees, teachers and principals including their service conditions and regulation of fees etc. would interfere with the right of administration of minorities?

Further in paragraph 124 of the judgment Apex Court has held as follows:

“In Lily Kurian v. Sr. Lewina this Court struck down the power of the Vice-Chancellor to veto the decision of the management to impose a penalty on a teacher. It was held that the power of the Vice-Chancellor, while hearing an appeal against the imposition of the penalty, was uncanalised and unguided. In Christian Medical College Hospital Employee’s Union v. Christian Medical College Vellore Assn. This Court upheld the application of Indust