SATISH CHANDRA, J.:- A learned single Judge of this Court has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court:-

"Whether an educational institution established by a religious or a linguistic minority is bound by the provisions of Section 16-G (3) (a) of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act?"

2. Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 16-G (3) of the aforesaid Act provides:-

(a) No Principal, Head Master or teacher may be discharged or removed or dismissed from service or reduced in rank or subjected to any diminution in emoluments or served with notice of termination of service except with the prior approval in writing of the Inspector. The decision of the Inspector shall be communicated within the period to be prescribed by regulations.

(b) The Inspector may approve or disapprove or reduce or enhance the punishment or approve or disapprove of the notice for termination of service proposed by the management.

3. Clause (c) of this provision provides for an appeal against the order of the Inspector to the Regional Appellate Committee. The Appellate Committee could, after such enquiry as it consider necessary, confirm the order or set aside or modify it.

4. The question referred to us relates to the fundamental right conferred by Article 30 (1) of the Constitution upon religious and linguistic minorities. This Article confers a right to the minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.

5. A similar question came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in the Ahmedabad St. Xavier's College Society v. State of Gujarat, (AIR 1974 SC 1389). In that case, the constitutional vires of several provisions of Gujarat University Act, 1949 were considered. Section 51-A of the aforesaid Act provided:-

"51-A. (1) No member of the teaching other academic and non-teaching staff of an affiliated college and recognised or approved institution shall be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank except after an enquiry in which he has been informed of the charges against him and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of those charges and until:-

(a) he has been given a reasonable opportunity of making representation on any such penalty proposed to be inflicted on him, and

(b) the penalty to be inflicted on him is approved by the Vice-Chancellor or any other officer of the University authorised by the Vice-Chancellor in this behalf.

(2) No termination of service of such member not amounting to his dismissal or removal falling under sub-section (1) shall be valid unless-

(a) he has been given a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the proposed termination, and

(b) such termination is approved by the Vice-Chancellor or any officer of the University authorised by the Vice-Chancellor in this behalf:

Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to .any person who is appointed for a temporary period only."

6. The attack in that case was upon clause (b) of Section 51-A as well as clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 51-A. Both these clauses provided that penalty or termination is to be approved by the Vice-Chancellor or any other officer of the University authorised by the Vice-Chancellor in this behalf. Ray, C. J. and Palekar, J., held:-

"The third set of provisions impeached by the petitioners consists of Sections 51-A and 52-A. Section 51-A states that no member of the teaching, other academic and non-teaching staff of an affiliated college shall be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank except after an enquiry in which he has been informed of the charges and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard and until (a) he has been given a reasonable opportunity of making representation on any such penalty proposed to be inflicted on him and (b) the penalty to be inflicted on him is approved by the Vice-Chancellor or any other officer of the University authorised by the Vice-Chancellor in this behalf. Objection is taken by the petitioners to the approval of penalty by the