2019 Supreme(All) 1054

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
Jai Ram Singh and Others - Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and Others - Respondents
Writ - A No. 38992 of 2017, 32779 of 2016, 1918 of 2017, 31974 of 2017, 34341 of 2017, 36609 of 2017, 42671 of 2017, 43512 of 2017, 43516 of 2017, 44815 of 2017, 44886 of 2017, 45434 of 2017, 45442 of 2017, 45529 of 2017, 45553 of 2017, 45842 of 2017, 46256 of 2017, 46264 of 2017, 47101 of 2017, 47715 of 2017, 48154 of 2017, 48177 of 2017, 48543 of 2017, 48545 of 2017, 48568 of 2017, 48633 of 2017, 48770 of 2017, 49115 of 2017, 51552 of 2017, 51554 of 2017, 53956 of 2017, 55537 of 2017, 56015 of 2017, 56017 of 2017, 56020 of 2017, 56024 of 2017, 56027 of 2017, 56029 of 2017, 56831 of 2017, 58718 of 2017, 60290 of 2017, 60300 of 2017, 606 of 2018, 610 of 2018, 2318 of 2018, 2319 of 2018, 2324 of 2018, 2328 of 2018, 2599 of 2018, 2998 of 2018, 3005 of 2018, 3007 of 2018, 9607 of 2018, 9837 of 2018, 10571 of 2018, 12921 of 2018, 13045 of 2018, 13089 of 2018, 16377 of 2018, 16560 of 2018, 16572 of 2018, 16749 of 2018, 16751 of 2018, 16754 of 2018, 16758 of 2018, 16771 of 2018, 16773 of 2018, 17433 of 2018, 17608 of 2018
Decided On : 23-05-2019

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Application for insertion of Article 21A in our Constitution by virtue of the Constitution (Eighty Sixth Amendment) Act, 2002 mandating the State to provide free and compulsory education to all children of the ages 6 to 14 years and the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) held that private institutions which were engaged in imparting primary education were performing and sharing an essential obligation of the State Challenging petition requiring the State to ensure compliance with the directions issued in that decision and frame a policy in relation to extending aid to unaided institutions in light of Article 21A and the RTE Act – Held, Writ Petitions insofar as they relate to primary sections attached to recognised and aided high schools or intermediate colleges covered by the provisions of the 1971 Act cannot be denied the protection of that statute – The petitions in this group falling under the aforesaid class shall stand allowed – The State is consequently directed to bring teachers falling in this class within the ambit of the 1971 Act subject to the requisite exercise being undertaken to assess that they satisfy the test of composite integrality – Primary sections attached to junior high schools are not covered under the provisions of the 1978 Act. No relief can be granted to them in light of the 2017 Amendments – The petitions preferred at their instance shall stand disposed of subject to liberty being reserved to challenge the 2017 Amendments as introduced in the 1972 and 1978 Acts, if so chosen and advised – Primary sections attached to junior high schools are not covered under the provisions of the 1978 Act –p No relief can be granted to them in light of the 2017 Amendments – The petitions preferred at their instance shall stand disposed of subject to liberty being reserved to challenge the 2017 Amendments as introduced in the 1972 and 1978 Acts, if so chosen and advised – State shall in consequence reconsider their claims for grant in aid in light of the policy that may be framed in light of the directions issued – Writ Petitions to the extent that they assailed the Government Order dated 27 October 2016 are disposed of in light of the directions issued above, no further consequential relief can be granted presently in their favour in the absence of a challenge to the 2017 Amendments introduced in the 1972 and 1978 Acts – Their right to assail these amendments is preserved to be raised in independent proceedings – Challenging to the impugned Government Orders are concerned – The unaided primary sections thereof cannot be granted any relief in the absence of a challenge to the 2017 Amending Acts – Their right to assail the same is preserved – The junior high schools in this group shall however be entitled to assert their claims afresh for grant in aid in light of the conclusions recorded in the body of the judgment – Appeal allowed. (Para 110, 111,112 and 113)

Facts of the case:

In Paripurnanand Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. And Others, (2015) 3 ADJ 567 a Division Bench of this Court noticing the insertion of Article 21A in our Constitution by virtue of the Constitution (Eighty Sixth Amendment) Act, 2002 mandating the State to provide free and compulsory education to all children of the ages 6 to 14 years and the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) held that private institutions which were engaged in imparting primary education were performing and sharing an essential obligation of the State. It held that a consequential duty stood placed on the State Government not only to provide grant in aid to such institutions but also make provision for requisite infrastructure being created in the field of primary education subject to reasonable conditions. The Division Bench noticed that the quality of education at the primary level is inextricably linked with the issue of trained and competent teachers. It took judicial notice of the fact that teachers in private unaided institutions were being forced to work in pitiable conditions. It consequently called upon the State to reconsider its policy of 1989 in respect of grant in aid to unaided institutions bearing in mind the constitutional mandate coupled with the provisions of the RTE Act. Following that decision, a learned Judge of the Court in Gram Vikas Sewa Samiti and Others Vs. Union of India And Others, (Writ-C No. 62182 of 2015 decided on 5 November 2015) proceeded to consider a challenge against the State refusing grant in aid to a Junior Basic School. Noticing the decision rendered in Paripurnanand Tripathi, the learned Judge disposed of the petition requiring the State to ensure compliance with the directions issued in that decision and frame a policy in relation to extending aid to unaided institutions in light of Article 21A and the RTE Act.

Findings of the case:

Writ Petitions insofar as they relate to primary sections attached to recognised and aided high schools or intermediate colleges covered by the provisions of the 1971 Act cannot be denied the protection of that statute – The petitions in this group falling under the aforesaid class shall stand allowed – The State is consequently directed to bring teachers falling in this class within the ambit of the 1971 Act subject to the requisite exercise being undertaken to assess that they satisfy the test of composite integrality – Primary sections attached to junior high schools are not covered under the provisions of the 1978 Act. No relief can be granted to them in light of the 2017 Amendments – The petitions preferred at their instance shall stand disposed of subject to liberty being reserved to challenge the 2017 Amendments as introduced in the 1972 and 1978 Acts, if so chosen and advised – Primary sections attached to junior high schools are not covered under the provisions of the 1978 Act –p No relief can be granted to them in light of the 2017 Amendments – The petitions preferred at their instance shall stand disposed of subject to liberty being reserved to challenge the 2017 Amendments as introduced in the 1972 and 1978 Acts, if so chosen and advised – State shall in consequence reconsider their claims for grant in aid in light of the policy that may be framed in light of the directions issued – Writ Petitions to the extent that they assailed the Government Order dated 27 October 2016 are disposed of in light of the directions issued above, no further consequential relief can be granted presently in their favour in the absence of a challenge to the 2017 Amendments introduced in the 1972 and 1978 Acts – Their right to assail these amendments is preserved to be raised in independent proceedings – Challenging to the impugned Government Orders are concerned – The unaided primary sections thereof cannot be granted any relief in the absence of a challenge to the 2017 Amending Acts – Their right to assail the same is preserved – The junior high schools in this group shall however be entitled to assert their claims afresh for grant in aid in light of the conclusions recorded in the body of the judgment.

Result: Appeal allowed.