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

1959 Supreme(Ker) 39

Judges : M.S.MENON,RAMAN NAYAR
Re - Appellant
Versus
Fr.Jose Callian - Respondent
Case No : A. S. No. 679 of 1958
Decided On : 02/11/1959
Advocates Appeared :
K. S. Sebastian; For Appellant C. M. Kuruvilla; For State

The establishment of another school in the same locality did not violate the petitioner's rights under Art.30 of the Constitution and did not amount to discrimination based on the petitioner's community.

Headnote:

Art.30 of the Constitution - Recognition of School - Minority Community - Establishment of Another School

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner's school recognition was withdrawn and another school was sanctioned in the same locality, leading to the petitioner's grievance based on violation of Art.30 of the Constitution.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the establishment of another school did not interfere with the petitioner's right to run his school and did not amount to discrimination based on the petitioner's community.

Issues: Recognition withdrawal and sanction of another school in the same locality, alleged violation of Art.30 of the Constitution, discrimination based on community.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the establishment of another school did not violate the petitioner's rights and did not amount to discrimination based on community.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed with costs, and the court upheld the recognition withdrawal and sanction of another school in the same locality.

Judgment :-

1. The appellant petitioner's grievances were:

(i) That by the order Ext. P2 dated 11-6-1958, the 4th respondent State Government withdrew the recognition accorded to the Upper Primary School that was being run by the petitioner, and,

(ii) that by an order dated 14-6-1958 the Government accorded sanction to the 3rd respondent to run a similar school in the same locality. The first of these orders was cancelled on 18-6-1958, five days before the institution of the present petition, and the second has been held in abeyance by an order dated 7-8-1958, so that, as pointed out by the learned single judge who heard the petition in the first instance, the petitioner has now no subsisting grievance. But he insisted and still insists that the second order must be quashed by this court as being in violation of Art.30 of the Constitution, the petitioner being a Roman Catholic and therefore a member of a minority community. Like the learned single judge we are completely at a loss to see how the establishment of another school in the same locality interferes with the petitioner's right to run his school and if the result thereof is that the petitioner cannot get enough pupils to earn a grant surely it cannot be said that the State is discriminating against him on the ground of his community. Even if, as alleged by the petitioner, the sanction granted to the 3rd respondent is against the provision of the Cochin Education Code, a body of rules which it has been repeatedly held by this court have no statutory force and are mere administrative directions, that sanction cannot amount to a discrimination against the petitioner on the ground of his community.

We dismiss the appeal with costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 250/- (Two hundred and fifty) one set.

Dismissed.

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top